Mennonite girls gather at the health and safety clinic in Ohio (AP/Tom E. Puskar)
In the previous 2 sections, this article introduced basic information on The Nation itself and on those concerned about vaccines, and began an analysis of The Nation article by responding to its assertions by presenting other material through links to immunology and epidemiology studies and to vaccine history.
Through out there is an effort not to guide your thinking by using emotion or sarcasm but to offer as many quality links as possible, to encourage you to learn as much as possible yourself and to research things for yourself. This involves your life, not just the lives of infants and school childrren, because the proposed mandates will include you and everyone you know. The Nation article provides no references at all, so there is an attempt to fill in many blanks here by bringing The Nation readers a much broader view of vaccines and of the global controversy surrounding them, than you may have had.
We pick up where we left off:
TN: Yet in the United States the anti-vaccination movement has seen increasing numbers of parents refuse measles and other vaccines "on behalf" of their unprotected children.
Yes, more and more parents distrust the MMR having learned out it, and some distrust other vaccines as well.
TN: That misguided movement began with the unconscionable malpractice of Andrew Wakefield.
Parents - what The Nation article would call "that misguided movement" - say they came to Wakefield, not he to them. He was a doctor who had been entirely uninvolved in autism or vaccines before they asked his help - about their children's gut problems. They say they went to him because he was a well-respected gastroenterologist.
But let those parents speak for themselves. Progressives can do their own comparison between wht is said by them and by The Nation.
This parent whose children were part of Wakefield's study addresses accusations against Wakefield that have been made since the beginning by corporate media. Since they are the same accusations being made by The Nation article, she is responding in a sense to the article here, so progressives have an opportunity to learn more, including from her direct experience.
I, as a parent of two children in the Lancet study, have had to speak out about the vicious attacks on Dr. Andrew Wakefield by his own government, the US government and the media blaming him for the measles outbreak in Wales.
The Lancet study was not paid for by the Legal Services Commission and our children were referred to the Royal Free Hospital because they were very sick and would still have had investigations done even if they were not part of the Lancet research as many more children have done after the Lancet study by other consultants at the Royal Free and other hospitals in London.
Dr. Andrew Wakefield listened to the concerns of many parents about their sick children suffering with bowel conditions and a form of Autism, a bowel condition and brain damage that was ignored by other professionals. These parents were demonstrably ‘black listed’ for saying their children became ill after the MMR vaccine.
Parents were speaking about this situation years before Dr. Wakefield came on the scene and our government also knew about these concerns years before the Lancet study yet they did nothing to investigate, leaving hundreds of other children at risk of side effects. Our government did not listen to parents but accused them of making the symptoms up and threatening to take their children away if they did not stop making a connection with MMR vaccine. As a result, these children and young adults live in a great deal of pain to this day (one doctor saying to my son ‘we believe you believe you are in pain’).
There is much more I could say about the experience of my family and others but I want to make it clear that the children’s claims in relation to MMR were supported by many other experts in several disciplines all of whom provided reports for the court. I attach a list of them. These experts would all have given evidence at the Royal Courts of Justice on behalf of hundreds of children we claim were damaged by the MMR vaccine had the cases been allowed to continue. In addition the solicitors representing the claimants were in touch with and drawing on the expertise from many more than these, but many did not want to be formal experts. I don’t know how much the experts listed were paid, but they were all paid fees just as Dr. Wakefield was in the normal way that experts are paid in litigation cases (and probably much less than the defendants’ experts were paid!).
MMR Claimant Experts (who produced reports that were served)
Professor M B Abou- Donia professor of Pharmacology and Cancer Biology and a professor of Neurobiology Duke University medical centre Pharmacology and neurobiology
Dr Kenneth Aitken K.Aitken Consultancy, Independent Consultant Child Clinical Neuropsychologist,
Professor William Banks Professor in the Department of Pharmacology & Physiology, both departments at Saint Louis University School of Medicine Pharmacology and Physiology
Dr. Edward Bilsky Associate Professor of Pharmacology University of New England College of Medicine Pharmacology
James Jeffrey Bradstreet, MD, Fellow, AAFP International Child Development Resource Center Adjunct Professor of Neurosciences Department of Psychology Stetson University Celebration, Florida Child development
And many more ....
For the rest of the letter and to the full list, go here.
And here progressives have an opportunity to "meet" Wakefield, here what he has to say, and decide for themselves whether he appears to be a danger to children, a medical fraud, and out for profit.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d7kbWfsygG4#t=25
The Nation readers are certainly aware of the concept of "reverse blame," a method by which those responsible fro wrong-doing take attention away from themselves and project it outward onto someone else. So, if one takes the accusations against Wakefield and applies them to those accusing Wakefield - the vaccine manufacturers and those invested in them - then it is the vaccine industry itself which is the danger to children, a medical fraud, and out for profit.
Back to The Nation article as it begins making accusations of Wakefield that the mother's letter and Wakefied himself may have addressed already. The value of analyzing The Nation article point by point, however, is that it can progressives a chance to see the arguments on both sides at the same time so they can watch what is happening around vaccines with more knowledge and awareness.
TN: A doctor who has since lost his license, he and his coauthors of a 1998 article in The Lancet made up a syndrome consisting of diarrhea and developmental disorder ("regressive autism") that he tried to link to the MMR vaccine for the sole purpose of financial gain. He was not at the time a practicing doctor, and had no expertise with autism, but he manipulated parental fears and an editor's penchant for controversial papers to secure publication in The Lancet, a respected medical journal. Extraordinarily, despite his financial conflict of interest, despite having fabricated the syndrome and falsified the data to "fit" his criteria, his paper passed peer review.
The Nation author's attack on Wakefield starts with an issue of timing - did Wakefield start a movement or was he approached by people who were seeking help for their autistic kids (see letter above). Were they an already existing "movement" of parents of autistic children concerned about vaccines?
The Nation's accusations continue. The reader could get mired in a "He did it" versus "No, he didn't" situation, so The Nation readers are encouraged to consider themselves an open source investigation into this since the mandating of a corporate product - vaccines - that can injure and kill people, including progressives and members of their own families - is on the table.
Needless to say, with the The Nation article and the mother's letter and the video of Wakefield, The Nation's readers are faced with two entirely conflicting reports of what happened. So it might be even more useful to take a step back from the fray and emotion, and look at who the players are and what is at stake, what is occurring structurally, and apply your political senses..
On one side, you have Andrew Wakefield, until the attack on him, a highly respected UK gastro-enterologist (which was why mothers went to him about their autistic children's gut issues). Everything he wrote on the association between autism and bowel issues has been supported in multiple other papers. He did not oppose vaccination but was concerned about the MMR (measles, mumps, rubella together) and suggested that parents use the single measles vaccine instead until the MMR could be researched further. He lost his job and license and left the UK and moved to the US where he began doing research, applying the CDC vaccine schedule, starting with infant monkeys and following them through as they got older . He filed libel suit against those who were attacking him. What it contains as evidence and where it is now in the courts is something others can research for themselves. He is likely getting donations from families for his monkey research with vaccines. Whether either of those is unethical profit seeking is up the the readers here to decide for themselves..
On the other side, there are people on the boards of or heavily invested in two of the largest vaccine corporations in the world, GSK and Merck - which both make the MMR vaccine. These people own global media empires - including Fox News, the WSJ, Reuters, News of the World and more - are partners with the Rockefellers, were involved in taking private corporate control over the Human Genome Project, and have influence over the Lancet which pulled Wakefield's article . For more read Murdoch and Vaccines http://salem-news.com/articles/july172011/murdoch-vaccines-wn.php
Here is a snapshot of just some of those involved who would be familiar to progressive readers of The Nation readers: Rupert and James Murdoch, David Rockefeller, George Soros, the CEO of Reuters, Goldman Sachs, and more - they're all close partners with a heavy stake in recombinant DNA (GMO) vaccines.
This little chart shows the vaccine industry on one side and Wakefield on the other and the connection between those behind the inquiry and behind the Lancet. For progressives it might give a fuller idea of the forces at play around the vaccines. Wakefield's single study (confirmed by many other peer reviewed studies) stepped on some "important" toes. They certainly tried to crush him using their global media.
Wakefield being attacked here by The Nation seems very odd, since The Nation should obviously - based on progressive politics - be exposing the corporate interests and especially Murdoch's involvement, rather than attacking an individual and bizarrely claiming he alone is responsible for an grassroots movement. This becomes an even odder accusation since that amorphous "movement" of parents of vaccine-injured children existed long before a few UK mothers came to Wakefield for help.
But Progressives have been so flooded by so many media articles excoriating Wakefiend, including from the NY Times, and now again here, that they may be triggered just by Wakefield's name, as though he were the personification of evil and is some great danger, some charlatan and scam artist.
Somehow Wakefield went from a respected MD to all that is unethical - medically, academically, financially - based on his one paper. Though progressives see Murdoch as dangerous politically and abhor Fox News he owns, when they hear about a individual doctor named Wakefield being attacked by Murdoch's media and almost all the rest of western media, and all at the same time, it's strange they do not ask whether something corporate is afoot or notice that "progressive media" has not only not weighing in on behalf of ordinary people whose children have been vaccine-injured (and which there is evidence since the government's vaccine compensation program has ordered payment to parents for their children's autism caused by vaccines), but progressive media has done no research whatever.
Progressive media has not investigated vaccines
Why has progressive media not exposed the immense financial interests at stake or the tremendous corruption of the pharmaceutical/vaccine industry? Instead, as in this Nation article, parents seeking help are set apart as part of a "misguided movement" and the doctor who did a paper asking questions about one vaccine, is roundly demonized.
In this way, progressives have ended up knowing nothing real about Wakefield, about vaccines, about immunology, about the vaccine experiments at Auschwitz by the pharmaceutical industry that put Hitler into office, about the history of the Rockefeller control over of all of medicine - medical schools, research institutes, medical journals, the WHO, the CDC, etc.. But progressives have learned a great deal that isn't true by it being trumpeted over and over and over again by mainstream media and echoed by "progressive" media."
Corruption of the pharmaceutical/vaccine industry
The corruption of the pharmaceutical industry is so rampant, warnings have gone out from everywhere - from the WHO, from Harvard, from insiders, from Croatia, from China, from a Cancer site reporting on work out of UC San Diego, from Forbes, etc. These are but a few examples.
Why hasn't Amy Goodman covered any of this? Why is she not reporting on the outrage over vaccine mandates in NY, occurring right under her nose? Could it be because she is funded by Soros who is invested in vaccines?
Progressive media did not cover the food safety bills, covertly written by Monsanto
The same thing occurred around the food safety bills, which put the entire food supply under corporate control, Monsanto control.
The Nation and progressive media provided no investigations or education to its readers of the corrupt history of "food safety" in the US, including what Bill Clinton did to food safety, both in Arkansas and then as president, nationally and globally, or that Hillary Clinton was supported by Monsanto and pushed for the corporate centralization of the food supply. Progressives relying on the The Nation didn't know the bills were written by Monsanto's VP, Michael Taylor.
The Nation playing on negative emotions, encouraged its progressive readers to go against their own interests and support Monsanto's take over of all food in the US
Instead, The Nation encouraged its readers to support the final bill by using antipathy for conservatives, suggesting anything the GOP opposes must be good":
"Even" food safety. The terrible and even stupid GOP are so bad, they "even" oppose safe food. That is a message for progressives to support "food safety" - though they were given none of the details in the bills or of the Democratic Party's involvement in making food considerably more unsafe on behalf of corporate interests. The message for The Nation readers is to push Obama to get "food safety" passed.
And the titles of The Nation articles on vaccines and on food safety set up its readers to be uncomfortable with "the other," and thus think or do the opposite of what they want or don't want.
Volunteer grassroots writers offered the only quality coverage of food safety
The Nation offered nothing substantive on the history of food safety and its previous dire consequences under Clinton, or on the Monsanto-planned take over of food under Obama. Whereas, there was stellar grassroots work on the subject. Many - dare one mention them positively ? - conservatives, libertarians, people with no political affiliation and a few progressives, who had direct knowledge of what was happening to farmers, made up an ad hoc media which tried their best to reach progressives and liberals to warn them they were being duped.
One example but there were so many, was work by Nicole Johnson, a mother in California who did what is still some of the most in-depth research on food safety.
Those powerful interests which led the NSAC to betray its members and not fight to protect non-GMO, real food in the US, are highlighted below.
"Has NSAC become a controlled opposition group? Does it appear to advocate for the interests of its grassroots membership while actually advancing the agenda of vested interests?
"If you examine NSAC’s membership list, you’ll find that among its participating members is the Wallace Center at Winrock International.[63] Winrock International was founded by Winthrop Rockefeller and counts in the long list of its funding partners numerous foundations, government agencies, international agencies, private sector groups and more, all of whom are aligned with vested interests that want international standards harmonized in order to eliminate barriers to international trade. Winrock International receives financial support from the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, the Rockefeller Brothers Fund, the Rockefeller Foundation, the DOE, USAID, the US Department of State, the USDA, the World Bank, the FAO, SYSCO and the Tides Foundation.[64] Winrock International also has long-standing ties with Monsanto, which has benefited from Winrock’s help in introducing its products to farmers in developing nations around the world. It’s hard to image that any organization advocating for the grassroots could be in partnership with a group funded by the likes of these powerful vested interests and not be subject to their influence or control.
What does this have to do with Wakefield and vaccines?
Every single one of those gigantic foundations, agencies, and corporations that supported Monsanto's food safety bill giving them control over all food in the US - are involved in vaccines and seeking mandates.
They successfully used The Nation to influence progressives - without their realizing it - to support Monsanto's removal of American's rights over their food.
And the are using The Nation again, this time in support of vaccines and the pharmaceutical industry's removal of Americans' rights over their own bodies.
Wakefield is the media boogie man. And The Nation's is using him in that way as well so progressives will emotionally reject him and whatever he has to say, so they will automatically and intensely reject hims, someone concerned about vaccines, and thus progressives will reject all concern about vaccines.
"All the present hullaballoo is not really about what Wakefield did. It is simply a ploy by a weak government and even weaker mainstream media to distract from the ever growing problem of vaccine damage and the expectation that the “CDC Whistleblower” William Thompson will ultimately give evidence before Congress that the CDC have known all along that MMR can cause autism (which is what Wakefield feared in 1998).
Others believe there is a massive attack on Wakefield because of the monkey study he has been working on since he left the UK a few years ago.
"The first phase of this monkey study was published three months ago in the prestigious medical journal Neurotoxicology, and focused on the first two weeks of life when the vaccinated monkeys received a single vaccine for Hepatitis B, mimicking the U.S. vaccine schedule. The results, which you can read for yourself here (http://fourteenstudies.org/pdf/primates_hep_...), were disturbing. Vaccinated monkeys, unlike their unvaccinated peers, suffered the loss of many reflexes that are critical for survival.
Dr. Wakefield and his scientific colleagues are on the brink of publishing their entire study, which followed the monkeys through the U.S. childhood vaccine schedule over a multi-year period. It is our understanding that the difference in outcome for the vaccinated monkeys versus the unvaccinated controls is both stark and devastating.
There is no question that the publication of the monkey study will lend substantial credibility to the theory that over-vaccination of young children is leading to neurological damage, including autism. ....
Perhaps you've already seen for yourself that you can't open the link to the study. This supports the idea that scientific censorship is occurring. I saw the earlier study but cannot find it now. It was showing a loss of the nursing reflex, a survival reflex if ever there were one.
But it's possible that the attack on Wakefield may go beyond needing a totemic figure to represent "false science" and "the evil of anyone questioning vaccines,: and even beyond the monkey study as well. It may be much bigger. Who is involved?
"This group (that is connected to attacking Wakefield) is currently advancing a world leading biotechnology trust, heavily invested in “genetopharmaceuticals” and flu vaccine genetic engineering. Strike the word "flu." They are heavily invested in vaccine genetic engineering.
"Members of this group, along with George Soros-directed assets, virtually monopolized the genetics industry during the 1990s, culminating in the corporate privatization of the Human Genome Project.
(Merck’s) Pneumovax vaccine, isbroadening markets as [that is, because] the main ingredient --laboratory engineered H1N1 virus-- mutates, as in the Ukraine, becoming more deadly.
These interests are the biotech industry. They are about genetic engineering. They have been genetically engineering grains, vegetables, fruits, oils, trees, animals, fish, insects, .... and more.
It is that "more" that Wakefield seemed to have gotten too close to.
These people are making large profit on the MMR and can expect to make billions more globally if vaccine mandates can be put in place. It is their global media empire which attacked Wakefield. Why? He simply wrote about gut issues in his paper and suggested that use of the single measles vaccine, rather than a trivalent vaccine (measles, mumps, and rubella combined) might be advisable until there were more research on the MMR.
Go to 1:37 in the video to hear about Wakefield's recommendation of the single measles vaccine because it had been more adequately tested for safety and the response he got, before it was actually removed from the market altogether.
Why does this matter, one vaccine versus another?
Wakefield's big crime may have been in just this - encouraging a return to the single measles vaccine. Why was that a problem? Because he may not have just suggested one vaccine rather than another.
Those involved in the MMR and other vaccines are involved in genetic engineering of vaccines and all the new vaccines are recombinant DNA (GMO) vaccines.
The single measles vaccine that Wakefield suggested was an earlier vaccine and likely was not genetically engineered.
If that simple vaccine was safe and the MMR was not, the enormous but unspoken threat Wakefield was touching on was that if there was a problem with the newer vaccine, that could potentially expose that it was actually quite different from the previous vaccines - that it was in fact a GMO vaccine. While that might not immediately sound negative, might even sound like "advanced science in better vaccines, the reality is that those vaccines are shooting GMOs into kids' DNA and their DNA is being altered. Vaccines are altering DNA.
Children are being genetically engineered by vaccines.
If that is so, Wakefield's encouragement to return to a single vaccine might lead the millions of people opposing GMOs in agriculture because of the increasing awareness of the diseases attendant on the DNA altering just of plants, to grasp in an instant the horror of children also being altered.
So a realization about GMO vaccines threaten a multitrillion dollar industry on the cusp on vaccine mandates for the entire world and the dream of astoundingly increased markets and thus profits beyond imagining. There are all those non-vaccinated children. There are all the adults in the world. There are all the vaccines they would get the CDC and WHO to list as required vaccines and all the multiple times any of the vaccines could be required to be given. And there was all that power over humans, over an particular DNA group of humans, allowing the pharmaceutical industry to putanything at all they wanted to concoct into those GMO mixes.
Wakefield's simple recommendation of what was likely an older and non-GMO vaccine threatened exposure of a plan for the global alteration (and degradation with lower species) of all human DNA.
That threatened exposure of a worldwide crime against humanity using vaccines, and by the very companies that put Hitler into office, experimented with vaccines on prisoners at Auschwitz, and went to prison for genocide and crimes against humanity. That exposure would throw a ringer into control of all human DNA. And it would destroy investments.
And that doesn't cover the patent aspect of this, because the vaccine industry is not just shooting GMOs into kids' human DNA and corrupting it with pig DNA, insect DNA and may be even synthetic DNA, what they are shooting into children is patented.
Anyone with any knowledge of how nefariously Monsanto has used its patented seeds to contaminate farmers' organic fields and then for Monsanto to claim ownership of its intellectual property, asserting it has been injured, will only take a moment to consider the legal implications of shooting patented pharmaceutical industry intellectual property into a child.
Who owns the child's DNA now?
Who owns the child's blood?
Who owns their organs?
Who owns their children?
It's a guess only that Wakefield's work comes close to describing the extreme consequences of GMO vaccines, for he was looking at the collapse of autistic children's functioning. How close was he to seeing it may have been due to DNA damage. And if he saw that, would he consider that GMO vaccines are damaging to children's DNA?
Is that why some children with autism have such a profound breakdown, mentally, physically, and even at the level of their mitochondria? Has their human DNA been so damaged, it can't function?
Is the great increase in autism not necessarily just linked to the number of vaccines but the fundamental CHANGE in the vaccines?
This change may be even more fundamental than the GMO change to food, since human DNA must support people doing things plants don't, such as think and move and speak - all function that autistic kids can lose.
Expose that the vaccines are GMOs and children's DNA is being wrecked with lower-species DNA, and there is a real danger that with that injection of truth into the vaccine controversy, and like autistic children's functioning, the entire vaccine empire could collapse, too. This multi-trillion dollar industry is hoping to double, triple, quadruple its profits through vaccine mandates to everyone in the world. With mandates in place, the skies the limit financially, and they already have more than 200 more vaccines in the pipeline.
There has been a huge effort by the pharmaceutical industry and the agencies it has captured to deny any association between vaccines and autism. Parents, and now researchers and doctors, point to the heavy metals (mercury, aluminum), cancer causing substances like formaldehyde, viral fragments and more, that could be playing a part in the breakdown or death of children. But pharma has managed to keep things at that level - it's toxins versus pharma controlled studies denying any harm and pharma-controlled media filling the airways and internet and papers and magazines and billboards with the necessity to vaccinate or children may die.
Those who know that unvaccinated children are 2-5 time healthier than those who are vaccinated, who know that huge numbers of children have been and are being disabled or killed by vaccines, who know how corrupt the whole system is, have not been able to reach others past the mountain of lies, scientific confusion and attacks on people like themselves, who do know and are attempting to warn others.
But GMO vaccines are is quite different. This is not about endless arguments over health or studies or outcomes, or over whether children are being injured by vaccines or are being saved from deadly diseases by them - with those controlling media and Congress having any say they wish. This is not about arguments.
No, this is about the undeniable fact of genetically engineered vaccines that are genetic engineering of children and adults by shooting GMOs in their DNA, and with patented material, and with the downgrading of human DNA with other species' DNA. There is no way around that.
Wakefield had to be attacked to distract as hard as possible from what is really going on until mandates are in place, until terrorism laws are in place to prevent any resistance to this, eve any reporting the truth of it.
Are children's human DNA being increasingly deconstructed with each additional GMO vaccine?
Others can determine that. But without question, children's DNA, their blue print as a human is being, is being altered.And the pharmaceutical industry wanted that mandated.
That's a show stopper.
Back to The Nation article:
TN: [Wakefield's] paper was then used to support litigation against three companies that produced the MMR vaccine, and to lobby for use of Wakefield's own measles-only vaccine. Wakefield went on to make more than more $600,000 in the process of the lawsuit alone.
Though The Nation is a political magazine that excoriates Murdoch, claiming to "Take on Rupert Murdoch",http://www.thenation.com/article/161984/nation-takes-rupert-murdoch# and though it was Murdoch papers that began and led the attack on Wakefield, and though Murdoch is connected to the GSK that produces the MMR (the measles vaccine that Wakefield questioned), The Nation article oddly doesn't mention Murdoch once. This is despite of the fact that what Murdoch did deeply affects The Nation readers personally,and in fact is a matter of life or death (so say all camps concerned about vaccines.)
TN: In his 1998 paper, Wakefield alleged that eight children developed autism six days after receiving the MMR vaccine. I remember the paper well, because I was a pediatric fellow in London at the time. I and every other pediatrician were immediately besieged by parents demanding measles-only vaccines. We were staggered by Wakefield's ridiculously small, uncontrolled and clearly biased study about a syndrome that none of us had heard of, even though the MMR vaccine had been widely used since 1968. But it was also hard to imagine that The Lancet would publish something with such obvious global ramifications unless there was irrefutable scientific evidence uncontaminated by financial interest.
Not a word from The Nation that the CEO of Reuters who is on the board of Merck which makes the MMR and is involved with Elsevier Publishers that puts out the Lancet that removed Wakefield's peer reviewed article.
TN: It took six years for The Lancet to admit Wakefield's financial conflict of interest
"Sir Crispin Davis, until recently chief executive of Reed Elsevier which owns the Lancet, failed to disclose his own conflicts while denouncing Andrew Wakefield to the House of Commons Science and Technology Committee in March 2004. Sir Crispin failed to disclose either that he was a non-executive director of MMR defendants, GlaxoSmithKline, or that it was his own brother Sir Nigel Davis who had endorsed the Legal Services Commission’s decision to pull the plug on the funding of the case in the High Court 3 days before ((HERE).
"This was barely more than a week after allegations had been levelled against Wakefield by Lancet editor Richard Horton, and Sunday Times journalist Brian Deer. Nor do Davis’s conflicts ever seem to have been mentioned by Horton.
"Remarkably, these relationships had been mentioned in Sunday Times article about Sir Crispin, just weeks earlier ...
TN: but it did not retract the paper until 2010. Meanwhile, the rise of measles in the United Kingdom and United States reflects the damage done, and the consequences extend well beyond the West.
Mennonite girls gather at the health and safety clinic in Ohio (AP/Tom E. Puskar)
Now, the article itself
[The Nation article will be marked by "TN" to help differentiate it from inserted passages.]
The article begins with "expertise" of the writer, a doctor in the US who writes of never encountering any measles here.
TN: "No cough, no measles" was one of the many mantras and memory aids I learned in medical school. Most were designed to reduce tomes like Gray's Anatomy and Harrison's Principles of Internal Medicine to a few rules. Much of the time, it was easy to miss the point, especially when the subject seemed to be an obscure disease.
Five years into a six-year medical degree at a typical Western university, none of us had ever seen measles. Nor were we bothered. Apart from HIV, microbes like measles seemed prehistoric. Public health was out, plastic surgery was in. Still, I remembered this particular rule, offered by a much-revered professor. But I wondered why he was so focused on a cough instead of "Koplik spots," the little white dots in the mouth that are specific to measles.
Suddenly the article shifts to Africa - where the author now speaks of measles in a context of horrific diseases - hemorrhagic fever, HIV, scarlet fever, syphilis, rheumatic fever, typhoid, tuberculosis, devastating meningococcal sepsis, enterovirus 68, Lyme disease, ....
TN: "Then I spent ten weeks in a pediatric infectious-disease ward in Cape Town. I thought I would see "African diseases" like hemorrhagic fever and HIV, which I did. But I also saw measles, rubella (German measles), scarlet fever, syphilis, rheumatic fever, typhoid, tuberculosis and many other causes of rash and fever.
Suddenly I could see the point of my professor's rule. The very first signs of measles are a fever and cough, followed by a runny nose and red eyes. The appearance of a rash three or four days later is usually what prompts parents to bring their child to the emergency room. The problem is that at any given time, half the pre-school children in the ER have a fever, rash or both. The differential diagnosis is hard enough in immunized children, ranging from mild roseola to devastating meningococcal sepsis; the long list includes enterovirus 68, Lyme disease and drug rashes.
The writer has now connected measles - though with no record of the last ten years of a single death in the US - in the reader's mind with one terrifying deadly disease after another. This is a strong fear inducer and it sets the stage for the rest of the article. This introduction of fear wasn't possible by writing about the US given how harmless measles is here.
Next, the idea of "catastrophe" for pregnant women if children are not vaccinated, is introduced, suggesting that pregnant women must be as well.
TN: In an unimmunized child, the ailment might also be rubella—harmless for the child, but catastrophic for unimmunized pregnant patients—or chickenpox.
This also suggests that not vaccinating children, misses the potential catastrophe to pregnant women. Both bring us to the distinction between vaccinated and immunized.
Immunized versus Vaccinated
The Nation article uses the word "unimmunized" but it is important for The Nation readers to understand that "immunized" and "vaccinated" are not synonyms. A person can be immunized by their mother's breast milk or by exposure to a disease without ever having been vaccinated. On the other hand, a person who has been vaccinated may not be "immunized."
There are a significant immunologic distinctions between naturally acquired and vaccine acquired immunity. The following article is a good introduction to those differences and the impact of each. An excerpt is included below.
Contracting childhood diseases helps prime the immune system.
From Immunology Today:
“Vaccination replaces recovery from infections with a rather different type of immunological stimulus. ... In the measles system [for instance], both vaccination and the infection itself have profound and long-lasting effects on the immune system, but these effects are not the same.”
“For example, recovery from natural measles infection reduces the incidence of atopy ["a predisposition toward developing certain allergic hypersensitivity reactions" ], and of allergic reactions to house dust mite to half the incidence seen in vaccinated children, suggesting a systemic and non-specific switch to Th1 activity.”
“indeed learning (immunological) is an absolute necessity, and these systems have evolved in the “anticipation” of appropriate inputs provided in an appropriate sequence after birth, and continuing throughout life” [Emphasis added.Comment added: The "inputs provided in an appropriate sequence," are a reference to childhood diseases.]
The person who has been vaccinated but may not be "immunized" if the vaccine doesn't work, wasn't matched to the strain of a virus that is of concern, or the vaccine is failing. While we have been taught that if a vaccine stimulates antibodies it will provide immunity, this is not the case.
".... the two poles of the immune system (the cellular and humoral mechanisms) have a reciprocal relationship in that when the activity of one pole is increased, the other must decrease. Thus, when one is stimulated, the other is inhibited. Since vaccines activate the B cells to secrete antibody, the cytotoxic (killer) T cells are subsequently suppressed." https://explorevaccines.wordpress.com/2008/10/26/antibodies-do-not-produce-immunity/
So, when The Nation article asserts the "unimmunized" pregnant women are in "catastrophic" danger, this only makes sense if the author is referring to the woman having no natural immunity.
The author is attempting to associate vaccines with immunity by using the word "immunized" rather than "vaccinated," though there is no one to one association. Vaccination doesn't necessarily immunize and may, if the reciprocal relationship between B cells and killer T cells is thrown off, actually disrupt immunity.
The Nation author is adding more fear in speaking of a potential catastrophic event if pregnant women are not vaccinated.
The problem, beyond whether vaccines do immunize or do not, is that pregnant women should not be vaccinated in the first place because there have been NO TESTS of vaccines on pregnant women showing them to be safe. Many vaccine inserts warn of this, themselves. The Nation is in effect promoting pregnant women getting untested vaccines.
"In A REPORT TO THE CONSUMER (Sept., 75) by Ida Honorof, she presents a compilation of data from the National Institute of Health—Division of Biologic Standards, Bulletin of World Health Organization, and Dr. J. Anthony Morris, former Director of a branch of FDA Virus research. Dr. Morris’ findings show that the flu vaccine, when inhaled by lab. animals "tended to enhance cancerous tumors." Pregnant women had been on the preferred list for shots until findings indicated that certain substances in flu vaccine "could pose a serious threat of fetal damage to women who might become pregnant. . ." [Book] Swine Flu Expose by Eleanora I. McBean, Ph.D., N.D.
The Nation reader might want to take a couple of minutes to see a short segment of a film entitled "Bought" in which, at 1:18:48, a CDC analyst points out an enormous spike in miscarriages with the 2009 flu vaccines. The H1N1 vaccine was linked to a 700% increase in fetal deaths.
What the analyst was focused on in the film was how a study of miscarriages could have stopped right before that spike and yet still included the year 2009, suggesting it was included in the study. This was a year doctors were watching carefully because that's when the H1N1 flu vaccine was introduced.
TN: "Or it might be measles, in which case you need to know. Fast. Because measles is the most contagious disease on earth.
The author has come back around to measles, having already set their readers' mental imagery with a series of deadly diseases and a catastrophe for unvaccinated pregnant women. Thus, one must act "fast."
It is quite important to keep an eye on how fear is injected into The Nation's article. Fear makes it harder for people to think clearly and easier to guide them in how to think (and politically, fear offers opportunities for control). Consider for a moment how much fear has been and is still being put out in this country just around flu. How many flu deaths do you estimate there are each year? You have been told by the CDC that 36,000 people a year die from the flu. That turns out to be greatly untrue. Some would say it's a lie.
This is from Jon Rappoport and his comments will be marked JR.
JR: "In December of 2005, the British Medical Journal (online) published a shocking report by Peter Doshi, which spelled out the delusion and created tremors throughout the halls of the CDC.
"Here is a quote from Doshi’s report:
“[According to CDC statistics], ‘influenza and pneumonia’ took 62,034 lives in 2001—61,777 of which were attributable to pneumonia and 257 to flu, and in only 18 cases was the flu virus positively identified.” [Emphasis added.]
The CDC's estimate was 2000 times the reality. And it has not retracted its number or reassured the public that flu is not a danger.
Back to the Nation's article:
TN: Among unimmunized people exposed to the measles virus, some 90 percent will contract the disease.
That figure of 90% seems enormous. It is 37.5 times larger than what the WHO asserts is the normal rate for contracting measles.
-- An unpublished study by the World Health Organisation (WHO) on a "measles susceptible" (malnourished) group of children showed that the group who hadn't been vaccinated contracted measles at the normal contract rate of 2.4%.
Of the group who had received the measles vaccine (MMR), 33.5% contracted measles.
Where did The Nation author get the 90% figure?
Having grown up at a time when it was normal to get the measles, I know from experience that 90% of children didn't contract it. It would have meant all the children in a class got, when only a few did. It would have meant whole schools would have shut down. Nothing at all like that happened, yet children routinely got measles.
"JON RAPPOPORT: [speaking to Sharyl Attkisson, health reporter for CBS] In 2009, you spearheaded coverage of the so-called Swine Flu pandemic. You discovered that, in the summer of 2009, the Centers for Disease Control, ignoring their federal mandate, stopped counting Swine Flu cases in America. Yet they continued to stir up fear about the “pandemic,” without having any real measure of its impact. Wasn’t that another investigation of yours that was shut down? Wasn’t there more to find out?
"SHARYL ATTKISSON: The implications of the story were even worse than that. We discovered through our FOI efforts that before the CDC mysteriously stopped counting Swine Flu cases, they had learned that almost none of the cases they had counted as Swine Flu was, in fact, Swine Flu or any sort of flu at all! .... With the CDC keeping the true Swine Flu stats secret, it meant that many in the public took and gave their children an experimental vaccine that may not have been necessary. ....
"JR: "Do you want the staggering capper on this foul tale? Roughly three weeks after Attkisson’s Swine Flu revelations appeared in print, the CDC, obviously in great distress over the exposure, decided to double down. The best lie to tell would be a huge lie.
"Here, from a November 12, 2009, WebMD article is the CDC’s response: “Shockingly, 14 million to 34 million U.S. residents — the CDC’s best guess is 22 million — came down with H1N1 swine flu by Oct. 17 [2009].” (“22 million cases of Swine Flu in US,” by Daniel J. DeNoon)
"22 million cases of Swine Flu in America. Roughly 1 out every 15 Americans came down with Swine Flu. What??"
Back to the Nation article:
TN: Anyone with measles is contagious for several days before the rash even appears; the cough effectively spreads tiny droplets of the virus, which can remain in the air for several hours, long after an infected person has left the room.
Stays in the air for several hours? Do only measles droplets have that ability? Droplets from shower spray surely doesn't.
TN: In an unvaccinated community, each person who gets measles spreads it on average to twelve others.
Where does that number come from?
But more, why does The Nation only mention a spread of viruses in "unvaccinated" community? It's well known that when people are vaccinated, they will shed viruses from the vaccines for up to 2 weeks afterwards, and are often told to avoid people with compromised immune system during that time.
Back to the Nation article which is sustaining a pretty consistent level of fear, yet with no evidence of its assertion.
TN: Complications like pneumonia and meningitis can be permanent, deadly, or both,
How can someone have both permanent complications and also be dead?
TN: .... especially for immune-compromised patients such as those with cancer. And in the ER, one of these kids might be in the next bed.
So, now kids with measles are killers of cancer patients? No one is dying of measles but those children are for some reason in the ERs and put into beds next to cancer patients?
CDC Admits Flu Vaccine Does Not Work – Influenza Outbreak on Fully Vaccinated Navy Ship - See more at: http://healthimpactnews.com/2014/cdc-admits-flu-vaccine-does-not-work-influenza-outbreak-on-fully-vaccinated-navy-ship/#sthash.mnDN7Ped.dpuf
CDC Admits Flu Vaccine Does Not Work – Influenza Outbreak on Fully Vaccinated Navy Ship - See more at: http://healthimpactnews.com/2014/cdc-admits-flu-vaccine-does-not-work-influenza-outbreak-on-fully-vaccinated-navy-ship/#sthash.mnDN7Ped.dpuf
CDC Admits Flu Vaccine Does Not Work – Influenza Outbreak on Fully Vaccinated Navy Ship - See more at: http://healthimpactnews.com/2014/cdc-admits-flu-vaccine-does-not-work-influenza-outbreak-on-fully-vaccinated-navy-ship/#sthash.mnDN7Ped.dpuf
TN: Older Americans remember measles as a common childhood disease that just had to be suffered through,
Yes. That's what it was.
TN: but in fact it is still frequently deadly in low- and middle-income countries.
What is a middle-income country? Is that meant to fold in the US in people's minds? If so, since measles has not been deadly in the US, it's not a problem here.
TN: And because the virus weakens the body's natural immune system,
Where is the evidence for this since the recovery from a natural measles infection is a positive thing for the immune system. As cited above, from Immunology Today,
"... recovery from natural measles infection reduces the incidence of atopy ["a predisposition toward developing certain allergic hypersensitivity reactions" ], and of allergic reactions to house dust mite to half the incidence seen in vaccinated children, suggesting a systemic and non-specific switch to Th1 activity.”
Which makes the next unsupported assertion of The Nation author also had to accept:
TN: children who survive measles get more infections and have a higher risk of dying from them for several months afterwards.
There is no evidence of children in the US getting measles and dying from infections months later. If so, the vaccine industry would be asserting in mainstream media, where it would likely be rebutted by pediatricians and researchers.
TN: So a doctor needs to be able to diagnose measles at "hello,"
For a disease that doesn't kill anyone? What's the hurry? It's just measles. The rush is useful, though for suggesting that measles is highly dangerous.
TN: and not wait for the results of two blood tests taken two weeks apart to see whether antibodies are rising while the child spreads measles, as happened at Disneyland. I rapidly learned to recognize measles at ten paces, and realized that the idea of using Koplik spots as a diagnostic aid was better suited to passing exams than clinical practice. Toddlers with measles tend to be extremely irritable (another clue) and not madly cooperative about opening their mouths on request for viewing. Nor would you want to get that close, if you're uncertain whether your parents had you immunized. [Emphasis added.]
This is one fearful doctor. The author of this articles seems not to know that millions of Americans have done just fine for decades without measles vaccines and they've raised and been around children with measles and some even aruond grandchildren with measles. No one is keeling over dead from it. Why should this doctor?
TN: So the crucial question becomes: Cough, or no cough? If there's no cough, it's not measles. Period. Which is good, as excluding measles early averts both parental and departmental panic.
Panic? How did panic get into this? Over what? Spots and itching?
TN: But if an unimmunized child or adult is coughing, take it very seriously.
First, most of the outbreaks of measles are occurring in heavily vaccinated populations, who were clearly not immunized by the MMR or they wouldn't have gotten measles. And children vaccinated with the MMR are who are primarily getting measles fits with the WHO study.
And shouldn't those people, the vaccinated ones with measles, be taken seriously or rushed out of ERs, too?
TN: Ensure that the child is kept away from places where he or she could spread the disease to others. Educate parents on how to treat the symptoms. And get the child out of the ER as quickly as possible before he or she infects other patients and staff.
Does this doctor get people with colds or flu or TB or viral pneumonia or other infectious diseases, out of the ER, too? Or just children who might have measles? Or is this still all in the service of attempting to make measles - which has been 100 times less deadly than measles vaccines - into something that seems scary?
TN: These steps are all the more vital now that measles, long forgotten, is "back" in the United States and far too few doctors know how to recognize it.
As in "back" like in the Exorcist movie?
Far too few doctors know how to recognize it because it's not a raging epidemic of moribund kids coming into hospitals for serious medical help. Kids with measles are at home spotty and itching and being told stop scratching and getting pampered and given treats to keep them happy, with siblings wishing they had it, too, for all the attention the measles child is getting it.
And, no, the measles is not "back." It has been causing measles since its inception.
"Not long after it was introduced, the first measles vaccine was actually found to manifest worse symptoms of measles in vaccinated patients than if they hadn’t gotten the vaccine at all. The vaccine also suppressed the normal rash and fever associated with measles, obstructing the normal immune response and ultimately leading to future health problems for vaccinated individuals once they reached adulthood." [Emphasis added.] http://www.shiftfrequency.com/ethan-a-huff-measles-vaccines-kill-more-people-than-measles-cdc-data-proves/
Look carefully at the non-science of the next sentence. It's entirely political and emotional as well. The inflammatory words are highlighted.
TN: And not only is measles proliferating; so are the nastyallegations about the danger of the vaccine by anti-vaxxer ideologues and unscrupulous politicians,
Putting that into simple English minus the emotion, we have this:
"Measles are increasing, and so are such references as that the CDC's own data showing the greater danger of the measles vaccine by people concerned about vaccine safety, and by politicians.
And the rest of The Nation's sentence:
TN: even though the vaccine is not only safe, but mass measles vaccination is also the single best public-health intervention we have.
So, in the first part of the sentence, The Nation calls anyone who questions the vaccines "ideologues" and "unscrupulous" and reduces whatever they say to only "allegations" and "nasty" ones at that. Those people seem quite bad - acting out of political rigidity and lack of ethics - and what they say untrue and ugly to boot.
In the second part of the sentence, the vaccines are said to be utterly safe and the very best health action we possess. Measles vaccines are more than okay, that are our ultimate health good.
It is surprising and disappointing to see such an extreme black and white, emotionally laden, divisive view of any issue coming from a magazine that is read by academics, intellectuals and others who are thinking people. It's what they would say of Fox News or grocery store rags.
As to the value of the measles vaccine, it's important to reference the charts above on the impact of nutrition on bringing down measles.
But the same pharmaceutical industry that is pushing vaccines that caused smallpox (which declined because of nutrition)has genetically engineered the food and poured glysophate on the GMOs plants, depleting nutrients in the soil and food. They created Codex Alimentarius after their CEOs got out of prison for genocide and crimes against humanity they perpetrated during WWII. Codex would remove access to supplemental nutrients worldwide and further deplete human of nutrition - which is why we see so many media articles attacking vitamins and why NY, controlled by the Rockefellers, is clearing major chain stores of supplements.
Here is a documentary about Codex is narrated by Dame Judy Dench. It is directly relevant to measles vaccines since vitamin A can prevent it and it was the ending of scurvy that brought measles down to almost nothing. But if the pharmaceutical industry removes nutrients from the world's food as they are doing now, there will be a return of all kinds of diseases.
So, when progressives think about measles vaccines, they should think about scurvy.
"Scurvy is probably the nutritional disease that has caused the most suffering in human history. It is often associated with longer ocean voyages that began in the 15th century. One account by George Anson's 1740-1744 circumnavigation around the world returned from its voyages with only 145 of its original members. Only 4 men had died of enemy action and 1300 had died of disease, primarily of scurvy. But, in fact, most cases of scurvy during the centuries have occurred on land. Scurvy was widespread in northern Europe during the Middles Ages and later in history most cases occurred when food became scarce, such as during the Great Potato Famine of 1845-1848, the American Civil War, the Crimean War, and World War I. An estimated 10,000 people died of scurvy during the California Gold Rush where adequate fruits and vegetables were not in abundance. As improvements in nutrition occurred scurvy deaths declined in conjunction with infectious diseases such as measles."
And what vitamin stops scurvy? C. And what molecule does the video above suggest is central in stopping virus, degenerative diseases, infections, toxins, .... everything? Vitamin C.
Progressives may want to be aware that the attempted removal of health rights around vaccines is moving hand in glove with the pharmaceutical industry's on three fronts at once - attempts to mandate vaccines across the US and globally [vaccines that are not actually the miracle the world has been told], removal of access to the nutrients that sustain life and cure diseases [and have killed no one during a time , and the contamination and degradation of the world's food supply with GMOs.
It's why we see efforts to say vitamins are worthless or dangerous. But UC Berkeley is having none of it.
We know historically that lack of nutrients was responsible for diseases and we've seen ourselves that GMOs in agriculture are causing diseases and people are left without choices. Pharma is responsible for the GMOs and people having little information, little choice. And pharma is working to remove access to nutrients through Codex. Both remove people's rights to determine and ability to control their own health. Diseases are Pharma's business (Codex is mentioned) and expanding that business means expanding diseases.
It is up to progressives to decide for themselves whether vaccines are modern miracles or also mean disease. Or perhaps progressives only need to decide whether mandating corporate products that can cause injury and kill is acceptable or not.
The Nation article is making claims for the measles vaccine that are as worshipful as the industry's long standing claims for the polio and smallpox vaccine, neither of which match the history of either.
1985, Texas, USA: According to an article published in the New England Journal of Medicine in 1987, "An outbreak of measles occurred among adolescents in Corpus Christi, Texas, in the spring of 1985, even though vaccination requirements for school attendance had been thoroughly enforced." They concluded: "We conclude that outbreaks of measles can occur in secondary schools, even when more than 99 percent of the students have been vaccinated and more than 95 percent are immune."[8]
1985, Montana, USA: According to an article published in the American Journal of Epidemiology titled, "A persistent outbreak of measles despite appropriate prevention and control measures," an outbreak of 137 cases of measles occurred in Montana. School records indicated that 98.7% of students were appropriately vaccinated, leading the researchers to conclude: "This outbreak suggests that measles transmission may persist in some settings despite appropriate implementation of the current measles elimination strategy."[9]
1988, Colorado, USA: According to an article published in the American Journal of Public Health in 1991, "early 1988 an outbreak of 84 measles cases occurred at a college in Colorado in which over 98 percent of students had documentation of adequate measles immunity ... due to an immunization requirement in effect since 1986. They concluded: "...measles outbreaks can occur among highly vaccinated college populations."[10]
1989, Quebec, Canada: According to an article published in the Canadian Journal of Public Health in 1991, a 1989 measles outbreak was "largely attributed to an incomplete vaccination coverage," but following an extensive review the researchers concluded "Incomplete vaccination coverage is not a valid explanation for the Quebec City measles outbreak.[11]
1991-1992, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil: According to an article published in the journal Revista da Sociedade Brasileira de Medicina Tropical, in a measles outbreak from March 1991 to April 1992 in Rio de Janeiro, 76.4% of those suspected to be infected had received measles vaccine before their first birthday. [12]
1992, Cape Town, South Africa: According to an article published in the South African Medical Journal in 1994, "[In] August 1992 an outbreak occurred, with cases reported at many schools in children presumably immunised." Immunization coverage for measles was found to be 91%, and vaccine efficacy found to be only 79%, leading them to conclude that primary and secondary vaccine failure was a possible explanation for the outbreak.[13
TN: As doctors, there are a few things that we know are fundamental to our well-being. Most of these are public-health measures that enable us to live much longer and better lives, even to grow taller, than 200 years ago. These measures of mass salvation include water purification, toilets and sanitation, garbage collection and disposal, and vaccination to protect children from infectious diseases like smallpox, polio and measles.
Vaccination is not one of those public health measures. It's a private, for profit technology that came along after the great reduction in diseases, though claiming credit for the reduction of diseases from nutrition and sanitation. Here the author even attempts to lump vaccination with the well known public health measures.
Vaccinations did not get rid of measles. Or smallpox. Or Pertussis. Or more.
"England and Wales began keeping mortality statistics even earlier than the United States starting in 1838. Again there was the same pattern in the immense decline in death from measles which began in the late 1800s. From a peak of 70.49 deaths per 100,000 in 1839 to 0.11 deaths per 100,000 in 1968 when measles vaccination started in England there is an impressive 99.8% decline in the death rate from measles.
"A similar picture emerges upon further examination of the statistics from England and Wales for Pertussis commonly referred to as Whooping Cough. From a peak of 61.90 deaths per 100,000 in 1861 to 0.20 in 1955 when the whooping cough vaccine came into use. Again there is a massive 99.6% decrease in mortality from whooping cough before the vaccine was introduced. In fact, the same pattern emerges for all infectious diseases - measles, whooping cough, scarlet fever, and diphtheria - all showed a decline in mortality starting in the late 1800s."
"So the big and obvious question is what did cause the eradication of infectious diseases if vaccines had little to do with it?
"Through the 1800s into the 1900s the western world underwent a series of amazing transformations. Improvements in nutrition, better public and personal hygiene, better housing and working conditions, and improvements in education all had a part to play in the societal transformation. [Emphasis added. And a note - they do not mention vaccination.]
EH: "Some will try to argue that measles deaths are essentially nonexistent now because of measles vaccines, the first of which was introduced in 1963. But this argument holds no water — U.S. measles mortality data shows that deaths from measles rapidly declined in the years leading up to when the first vaccine was introduced, validating the success of improved sanitation and better nutrition in making measles a non-problem.
"This plotted graph from HealthSentinel.com visually illustrates this:
EH: "What you may not have heard, is that by 1963, the death rate from measles in the United States had already dropped by approximately 98%,” explains the International Medical Council on Vaccination (IMCV).
Now The Nation brings in the small pox vaccine, clearly unaware of its actual history of causing small pox. The History of Health is a fascination chronology of major health events since 540 AD. It makes what is said here about smallpox look quite off.
TN: Smallpox was a seriously nasty disease, with a fatality rate of 30 percent. For those who survived, the pocks were permanent, and not pretty. Eradication of this vicious virus was the result of achieving global herd immunity, a feat of international cooperation and cost-effective investment in a global good. Herd immunity comes from mass vaccination and eliminates the virus.
1723 First record of smallpox immunization in Ireland, when a doctor in Dublin inoculates 25 people. Three died, and the custom was briefly abandoned.
1724 First record of vaccination for smallpox in Germany. It soon fell into disfavor due to the number of deaths. Years later, doctors were able to reintroduce it.
1754 Inoculation for smallpox introduced in Rome. The practice was soon stopped because of the number of deaths it caused. Later, the medical profession would successfully reintroduce it.
1763 Epidemic of smallpox in France wipes out a large part of the population. It was immediately attributed to inoculation, and the practice was prohibited by the French government for five years.
1791 Edward Jenner vaccinates his 18 month old son with swine-pox. In 1798 he vaccinates his son with cow-pox. His son will die of TB at the age of 21.
1796 Edward Jenner in Gloucestershire, England credited with concept of vaccination. Jenner vaccinates an 8 year old boy with smallpox pus. Jenner would vaccinate the boy 20 times. The boy would die from TB at the age of 20.
1810 The London Medical Observer (Vol.VI, 1810) publishes particulars of "535 cases of smallpox after vaccination, 97 fatal cases of smallpox after vaccination and 150 cases of serious injury from vaccination, ten of whom were medical men."
1822 The British government advances Edward Jenner another £20,000 for "smallpox vaccine" experimentation. Jenner suppresses reports which indicate his concept is causing more deaths than saving lives.
1831 Smallpox epidemic in Wurtemberg, Germany, where 995 vaccinated people succumb to the disease.
1831 In Marseilles, France, 2000 vaccinated people are stricken with smallpox. .
1855 Compulsory nature of Massachusetts vaccination statute firm, and a pre-condition for school admittance. Statutes created in the belief it would "protect children from smallpox."
That medical certainty about vaccination went along with this medical certainty:
1855 New Orleans Medical and Surgical Journal sports an editorial which declares that "masturbation is the destroying element of civilized society."
1857 Vaccination in England enforced by fines. Smallpox epidemic begins in England that lasts until 1859. Over 14,000 die.
1867 Vaccination Act of 1867 in England begins to elicit protest from the population and increase in the number of anti-vaccination groups. It compelled the vaccination of a baby within the first 90 days of its life. Those who objected would be continually badgered by magistrates and fined until the child turned 14. The law was passed on the assurance of medical officials that smallpox vaccinations were safe.
1871 In Birmingham, England from 1871 to 1874, there were 7,706 cases of smallpox. Out of these, 6,795 had been vaccinated.
TN: It [smallpox vaccineation] protects the entire community—particularly children and adults who can't safely be immunized and babies who are too young (a child must be 6 to 9 months old before the immune system is sufficiently developed for the vaccine to work). When the global campaign began in 1967, there were 10 to 15 million cases of smallpox each year. Places that had attained herd immunity, such as Europe and North America, had to maintain it to prevent imported cases from India and Africa from triggering an epidemic while rigorous surveillance to diagnose every last case and mass vaccination campaigns around the world created global herd immunity.
Medical history doesn't match The Nation author's assertions. Smallpox vaccine campaigns did not stop smallpox but based on the medical history, appears to have greatly contributed to it. Smallpox declines through public health measures, as did all other infectious diseases.
"Even smallpox, that interestingly was in some apparent synchronicity with the biggest killer of all scarlet fever, did not begin its decline until the late 1880s over 70 years after Edward Jenner, the father of modern vaccination, made his observations in 1798. Despite strict vaccination laws in England smallpox raged on in epidemics culminating in the large 1872 pandemic.
"All infectious diseases began their decline in the late 1800s well before vaccines were developed with the exception of the smallpox vaccine that showed no effect on these 1800s smallpox epidemics.
"In the case of scarlet fever there was no vaccine used at all with this deadly disease fading away over time."
And here are more specific examples of how the smallpox vaccine did not stop smallpox.
1871 In Bavaria, Germany, vaccination is compulsory and re-vaccination is commonplace. Out of 30,472 cases of smallpox, 29,429 had been vaccinated.
TN: Ten years later, the virus died out.
It did that on its own, like scarlet fever, because of public health measures.
But the CDC, connected to the CIA, stores smallpox. They just came across it in an NIH closet in Maryland.
"Vials of the virus that causes smallpox were found in a National Institutes of Health research building that was unequipped and unapproved to handle the deadly pathogen, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
"Because it’s so infectious, the smallpox virus is considered a bioterrorism threat and is only permitted in two labs in the world: One at the CDC's Atlanta headquarters and another at the VECTOR Institute in Russia. The newly discovered vials violate an international agreement reached in 1979 aimed at keeping the virus eradicated while allowing some scientists to continue studying it."
The CDC maintains it (perhaps synthesized as Bill Gate's polio vaccines, which would make it more deadly) for biologic warfare purposes.
TN: Smallpox eradication is the public health success story of the twentieth century,
See above from how the CDC is treating that.
Yes, smallpox eradication was a public health success story. But vaccination is not a public health measure but a corporate enterprise. One can look at historical examples below and decide whether the smallpox vaccine stopped smallpox
1871 Select committee of the Privy Council convened to inquire into the Vaccination Act of 1867 (England), as 97.5% of the people who died from smallpox were vaccinated for it.
1872 Japan institutes compulsory smallpox vaccination. Within 20 years 165,000 smallpox cases manifest themselves.
1872 In England, 87% of infants are vaccinated for smallpox. Over 19,000 die in England and Wales. (See 1925).
1884 In England, Dr. Charles Creighton is asked to write an article for the Encyclopedia Britannica on vaccination.After much research internationally, he concludes that vaccination constituted "a gross superstition". Later, Creighton writes two books, "Cowpox and Vaccinal Syphilis" and "Jenner and Vaccination".
1884 In England, more that 1700 children vaccinated for smallpox die of syphillis.
1884 Dr. Sobatta of the German Army reports on the results of vaccination to the German Vaccination Commission, which subsequently publishes data proving that re-vaccination does not work. Deaths from vaccination are routinely covered up by physicians.
1886 A seven year period begins in Japan where 25,474,370 vaccinations and re-vaccinations are performed in Japan, representing 66% of the entire population of Japan. During that period, there are 165,774 cases of smallpox with 28,979 deaths. (See 1955).
1887 In England, Dr. Edgar M. Crookshank, professor of pathology and bacteriology at Kings College, is asked by the British government to investigate the cowpox outbreak in Wiltshire. The result of the investigation was contained in two volumes of "The History and Pathology of Vaccination", in which he states that "the credit given to vaccination belongs to sanitation".
1905 Eleven states in the US have compulsory vaccination laws; 34 states do not. No states physically force injections on citizens, [Relevant to today:] Vaccination was made compulsory without state legislation providing for analysis of its history.
1927 British government appoints a committee to inquire into "vaccine lymph", as it is noticed that the "glycerinated calf lymph" used in vaccinations causes deaths from "sleepy sickness". Two London professors bring notice of the problem to the government in 1922. It takes 5 years before the government responds.
1927 Smallpox in England dwindles almost to the vanishing point. Fatality of the unvaccinated cases is less than half of the vaccinated cases.
TN: and because of it [smallpox vaccination], we are now determined to try to eradicate other infectious diseases, such as polio and measles.
That determination, then, is based on dangerous ignorance and a mass promotion of it to the public. The Nation magazine should be providing its readers the actual history and science. Whe is it offering only unreferenced assertions?
1928 Edward L.Bernays, nephew to Sigmund Freud, writes the book Propaganda, in which he explains the structure of the mechanism which controls the public mind, and how it is manipulated by those who wish to create public acceptance for a particular idea or commodity.
Says Bernays, "those who manipulate this unseen mechanism of society constitute an invisible government which is the true ruling power of our country. Our minds are molded, our tastes are formed, largely by men we have never heard of."
TN: Polio, perhaps the most frightening disease of the twentieth century on account of its invisible spread and devastating effect, crippled tens of thousands of children each year before the discovery of a vaccine sixty years ago.
In 1949, more than half a decade before the Rockefellers, who controlled the March of Dimes, put out the Salk and Sabine vaccines, Dr. F. R. Klenner in Reidsville, NC, cured every one of the 60 cases of polio that came under his care, using IV vitamin C. orthomolecular.org/library/jom/1991/pdf/1991-v06n02-p099.pdf
Polio was curable. Most children didn't get it but if they did, it would be no threat to them. But there is no profit in cures, and certainly not such cheap and easy ones. What cured polio is a cure for all viruses and does much else beside.
Here is an explanation for how one molecule can do so much. But progressive readers may understand that, in fact, what they are hearing is a unified field theory of all disease, bringing together biology and physics.
Because vitamin C is an absolute viricide, it makes vaccines are obsolete. And vaccines are mixing viruses which are mutating and that leads to more vaccines. And vaccines can be about the wrong strain and do nothing to help. And vaccines can be slow to develop in terms of isolating strains and testing and hoping for efficacy. Vitamin kills all viruses, all strains, even genetically engineered ones, needs not lead time for development and testing, has not negative side effects, has endless positive side effects, is not limited in which group can receive it, including those terribly ill or even terminal. In fact, as far as terminal, the NIH ran a study replicating Linus Pauling's protocol, and remarked on "unexpectedly long survival times" in those terminal cancer patients, asking whether IV vitamin C shouldn't be considered for cancer treatments. The public has known for years and left the NIH in the dust. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1405876/
TN: Americans can be rightly proud of the March of Dimes,
The Rockefellers who are enormously wealthy, set up the March of Dimes and collected the donations. Mothers just did the work.
TN: .... an enormous effort driven by American mothers, which raised tens of millions of dollars to find a vaccine.
The vaccines, both the Sabin and the Salk caused polio right out of the syringe, and this was covered up by media and government agencies, though some US states banned the vaccines because of all the cases of polio they were causing. There was great manipulation of medical data to make it appear - before the vaccines - that polio was a vast threat and to make it appear after the vaccines that the vaccines had stopped an epidemic.
"Only thirteen days after the vaccine had been acclaimed by the whole of the American Press and Radio as one of the greatest medical discoveries of the century, and two days after the English Minister of Health had announced he would go right ahead with the manufacture of the vaccine, came the first news of disaster. Children inoculated with one brand of vaccine had developed poliomyelitis. In the following days more and more cases were reported, some of then after inoculation with other brands of the vaccine. Then came another, and wholly unlooked-for complication. The Denver Medical Officer, Dr. Florio announced the development of what he called ‘satellite’ polio, that is, cases of the disease in the parents or other close contacts of children who had been inoculated and. alter a few days’ illness in hospital, had returned home: they communicated the disease to others, although not suffering from it themselves.
"On June 23rd, 1955 the American Public Health Service announced that there had been 149 confirmed cases of poliomyelitis among the vaccinated, with six deaths, and 149 cases among the contacts of children given the Salk vaccine, with six deaths. Nor is this the end of the story; how many vaccinated children will eventually be reported as developing the disease is as yet unknown, but it is at any rate limited by the fact that the distribution of further batches of vaccine was suspended on May 6th, the actual manufacture of Cutter vaccine, which had been responsible for most of the polio cases, having been stopped altogether, pending a full inquiry, by the National Institute of Health on April 28th."
There were simple categorization changes to determine incidence of the disease.
"Polio cases were predetermined to decrease when the medical definition of polio was changed. Cases of polio were more often reported as aseptic meningitis after the vaccine was introduced, skewing efficacy rates. Source: The Los Angeles County Health Index: Morbidity and Mortality, Reportable Diseases.
"The fact that dubious tactics were used to fabricate efficacy rates was corroborated by Dr. Bernard Greenberg, chairman of the Committee on Evaluation and Standards of the American Public Health Association during the 1950s. His expert testimony was used as evidence during Congressional hearings in 1962. He credited the “decline” of polio cases not to the vaccine, but rather to a change in the way doctors were required to report cases: “Prior to 1954 any physician who reported paralytic poliomyelitis was do- ing his patient a service by way of subsidizing the cost of hospi- talization... two examinations at least 24 hours apart was all that was required... In 1955 the criteria were changed... residual paralysis was determined 10 to 20 days after onset of illness and again 50 to 70 days after onset... This change in definition meant that in 1955 we started reporting a new disease... Furthermore, diagnostic procedures have continued to be refined. Coxsackie virus infections and aseptic meningitis have been distinguished from poliomyelitis... Thus, simply by changes in diagnostic criteria, the number of paralytic cases was predetermined to decrease... [52:96,97]”
"In 1955 Time Magazine wrote of the National Foundation for Infantile Paralysis blowing the danger of polio out of proportion. But why would anyone blow out of proportion something as serious as polio? Here is a snippet from that article:
“All week the air was full of brickbats for Secretary Hobby and her department, although President Eisenhower defended her (see NATIONAL AFFAIRS). In retrospect, a good deal of the blame for the vaccine snafu also went to the National foundation (for Infantile Paralysis [the Rockefellers]), which, with years of publicity, had built up the danger of polio out of all proportion to its actual incidence, and had rushed into vaccinations this year with patently insufficient preparation.” emphasis added
"As a researcher I had to force myself to rethink the implications. I asked myself the question, “If the Rockefellers helped create the Federal Reserve Bank and now manipulate our wealth, are they doing the same through vaccines in order to manipulate our health?” Continue reading ... http://vactruth.com/2010/08/18/rockefeller-vaccine-secret-revealed/
Back to The Nation article:
TN: The global campaign to eradicate polio required massive international cooperation, overcoming Cold War divisions, to bring the number of global polio cases today down to a few hundred a year—tantalizingly close to eradication.
The author is referring to the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation's global campaign with polio vaccines. However in synthesizing the polio virus, BMGF made eradication impossible.
"It was hoped that following polio eradication, immunisation could be stopped. However the synthesis of polio virus in 2002, made eradication impossible. It is argued that getting poor countries to expend their scarce resources on an impossible dream over the last 10 years was unethical.
"Furthermore, while India has been polio-free for a year, there has been a huge increase in non-polio acute flaccid paralysis (NPAFP). In 2011, there were an extra 47,500 new cases of NPAFP. Clinically indistinguishable from polio paralysis but twice as deadly, the incidence of NPAFP was directly proportional to doses of oral polio received. Though this data was collected within the polio surveillance system, it was not investigated. The principle of primum-non-nocere was violated.
"The authors suggest that the huge bill of US$ 8 billion spent on the programme, is a small sum to pay if the world learns to be wary of such vertical programmes in the future." [Emphasis added.]
It is exactly such a dangerous vertical program being promoted in the US now through the mandating of vaccines.
TN: Measles, like polio and smallpox, is a horrible disease.
The author continues to conflate measles with more serious diseases, never once pointing out to The Nation readers that there have been no deaths from measles in the US in over a decade. Instead the effort is to frighten people by pulling in the big classic threats. However, even those threats are not what they seemed.
"The Vaccine movement, promoted by the FDR Whitehouse, promoted actively, supported DDT spraying and soaking of infant’s rooms, clothes, and of children at the beach:
"Dr. Morton Biskind protests, to Congress, regarding the toxicity of DDT, and its role in “Polio”:
"Following a recent extensive trip through the South, Dr. Mobbs informed me that wherever DDT had been used intensively against polio, not only was there an epidemic of the syndrome I have described but the incidence of polio continued to rise and in fact appeared where it had not been before. This is not surprising since it is known that not only can DDT poisoning produce a condition that may easily be mistaken for polio in an epidemic but also being a nerve poison itself, may damage cells in the spinal cord and thus increase the susceptibility to the virus.
The Rockefellers were involved in DDT and "epidemics" appeared where DDT was sprayed, they produced the vaccines, they controlled the March of Dimes, and they made a fortune. The vaccines forced on American children often caused polio and later caused cancer from the SV40 (Simian virus) in them.
Yet, polio was being easily and cheaply cured with mega doses of vitamin C more than half a decade before the polio vaccines were released.
TN: it's still a major killer of children under 5 years of age in the developing world.
The US is not the developing world. Yet for some reason The Nation author is strongly pushing the measles vaccine on its US audience, though 1) it is associated with autism, 2) the CDC hid the autism data surrounding it, 3) it causes measles, and 4) it has caused 108 deaths in the last 10 or so years, and 5) measles caused none in the same time period. Where's the logic to support using the MMR at all?
TN: The development of a vaccine was widely welcomed.
By whom? According to the WHO study, the vaccine causes measles. It's likely the people whose children were being given it, noticed.
TN: It is usually delivered jointly with vaccines for mumps and rubella, known in combination as MMR. One shot provides at least 95 percent protection and offers enduring immunity.
Again, the CDC has a whistle blower researcher reporting that data showing the MMR causes autism, and at especially high rates among African American little boys, was hidden. If the vaccine offer "enduring" immunity, why are there outbreaks among vaccinated groups and why is the CDC saying people need more than one dose of the MMR? And why do the measles vaccines shows outbreak after outbreak in one heavily vaccinated community after another?
TN: But because of vaccination lapses, measles is now on the rise.
As the outbreaks in the article above show, the outbreaks have nothing to do with "lapses." The measles vaccine either doesn't provide immunity or it causes measles itself, both of which the FOIA-obtained secret UK government documents indicate.
TN: There were twenty separate outbreaks in the United States in 2014, involving 644 individual cases—a record number since measles was eliminated from the US in 2000.
A failing vaccine will do that. But where's the crisis? The kids just had the measles and got over it. Their natural immune system met the challenge and now they have life time immunity. Something quite positive is occurring.
TN: So far in 2015, there have been 141 cases in seventeen states, 80 percent of which are linked to Disneyland. Blaming it on Mexico and porous borders, as some opportunistic politicians have done, has no basis in reality; there were only two cases in Mexico in January, both imported from the United States.
Where is the evidence for that? Why are there no links to any studies each time the author makes an assertion?
TN: Globally, the number of cases rose from 122,000 in 2012 to 146,000 in 2013, reversing a twelve-year downward trend. In November 2014, the World Health Organization (WHO) gave up on meeting its target for measles control.
Above, there is mention of failing vaccines, but it's time to talk about the most serious problem with the measles vaccines and with all the vaccines today.
All the new vaccines - what are called third generation vaccines - are recombinant DNA vaccines. They are GMO vaccines. The earlier vaccines were not. Now,Researchers at the vaccine companies create GMOs combined of various viruses' DNA and/or animal DNA and/or insect DNA, and possibly even synthetic DNA, and shoot them into the person. They are seeking "DNA uptake," that is, for the DNA itself to be altered, just exactly as Monsanto does in shooting GMOs into seeds to genetically alter them.
This goes way beyond what people's have been taught about vaccines, that a tiny bit of virus is injected into a person to stimulate their immune system. The new vaccines are altering people's DNA.
Enzo Paoletti and Dennis Panicali at the New York State department of Health, devised a Strategy to produce recombinant DNA vaccines by using genetic engineering techniques. They were able to transform ordinary smallpox vaccine into vaccines that may be able to prevent other diseases.
The mixing of viruses to try to stop even more diseases sounds very scientific and beneficial but these recombinant DNA (GMO) vaccines are highly unstable. Veterinarians have begun putting out warnings of what they see occurring with rabies vaccines.
"In addition to the danger of jumping species and return to virulence, there is another frightening way for these new viruses to spread: aerosolization. It used to be that we could feel pretty safe about rabies because the chances that our dogs would trade saliva with another animal were pretty slim. Nowadays, thanks to recombinant vaccines, there is no bite required. The Center for Disease Control acknowledges that rabies can be spread via aerosolization so you or your dog need only be in close proximity to a rabies infected animal to be in danger.
One can see here the mixing of viruses and their application to various vaccines
What Paoletti and his colleague, Virologist Dennis Panicali, set out to do was to alter the DNA of cowpox virus by inserting a gene from another virus (namely herpes, hepatitis B or influenza). These efforts resulted, amongst others in the development of a commercial Hepatitis B vaccine which is now widely used. HPV vaccine is another notable recombinant DNA vaccine.
The HPV vaccine has caused an extraordinary number of deaths (over 100 according to government statistics, and many times higher by lawyers keeping tract) and almost 8 times that who have been disabled. http://sanevax.org/new-death-post-gardasil-updated-vaers-figures-report-that-hpv-vaccines-adverse-reactions-are-50-higher-than-other-age-related-recommended-vaccines/
Reaction to a hepatitis vaccination:
The HPV vaccine and brain damage
It's not just that the recombinant DNA (GMO) vaccines are creating a situation in which diseases can happen now in new ways and be more virulent, though.
Once one stops thinking about the diseases themeslves for moment, what becomes obvious is that shooting GMO material into a person's DNA and having it taken up by that DNA means that human DNA is being altered by these vaccines.
This is occurring without anyone being informed, and without anyone signing a contract to agree to the contamination of their unique intellectual property derived over millennia - their or their child's human DNA.It is being contaminated with DNA from lower species, including insect DNA and possibly even synthetic DNA.
These vaccines, thanks to Bill Gates global vaccine campaign is globally degrading human DNA from fully human to DNA that is contaminated with DNA from other species, something that could NEVER have happened naturally.
Human being - without their awareness - are becoming less human at the level of their DNA, which is the very blueprint for human life, because of vaccines.
In the next section, this article will press on with its analysis of The Nation article since The Nation's promotion of vaccines, in hitting on the common divisive issues surrounding vaccines, offers an opportunity for more information and a broad overview of vaccines and their history that may be new to The Nation readers and to progressives in general, and perhaps is useful to have collected in one place.
Part 3 will include The Nation's accusations of Andrew Wakefield as having started an anti-vaccine movement that has spread world wide, with additional information about the history of what occurred with Wakefield's study, who was involved, and questions about what may be at stake in an attempt to explain why Wakefield is now again being attacked by global media.
I won't introduce myself personally in order to encourage you to toss out any way in which you might be influenced by names, or status, or connections, so you can focus instead on the information that is in this letter and the links provided and trust your own judgement of all of it. You are being asked to think past what the Nation tells you, past what the media tells you, past what you were "taught" in school. Rely on your own logic, on your own discernment, on your instinctual desire to protect yourself and your family, and on your knowledge of corporate power and how it operates.
The Nation article itself does not say say this to its readers though it would fit them very well and respect their intelligence and abilities:
"There is a debate raging in the US right now over every aspect of vaccines, challenging the whole paradigm of vaccine use and bringing in much new information. We strongly encourage you to research on your own, become as educated as you can, draw from as many and as wide sources as you can, and of course, as progressives, keep thinking politically and asking "Cui bono?
This article is not meant to be an "argument" with The Nation piece but to use it as a counterpoint to flesh out some of the science, history, and financial interests surrounding vaccines, so the reader can begin to become familiar and start to engage the issue from a much broader knowledge base.
While I no longer think political labels make sense and have cut us off from valuing and listening to each other, I once considered myself a progressive and was a subscriber to the Nation.
".... the "left" versus "right" split is fraudulent and used to control the debate and condition citizens to think along certain lines. Left-wing magazines like the "The Nation" and "The New Republic" and right-wing magazines like "The National Review were "artificially set up." The former were financed by Whitney money while the latter by Buckley. Both are "The Order." ["See list of Skull and Bones members. (Far too many to post here)]
"Dr. Sutton states: "Sooner or later people will wake up. First we have to dump the trap of right and left. This is a Hegelian trap to divide and control."
"The professional Progressive Movement that we see reflected in the pages of The Nation magazine, in the online marketing and campaigning of MoveOn and in the speeches of Van Jones, is primarily a political public relations creation of America’s richest corporate elite, the so-called 1%, who happen to bleed Blue because they have some degree of social and environmental consciousness, and don’t bleed Red. But they are just as committed as the right to the overall corporate status quo, the maintenance of the American Empire, and the monopoly of the rich over the political process that serves their economic interests."
Was The Nation article written independently or was it directed or even given to the Nation to post as theirs?
Because the CIA is also tied to the CDC which is in charge of the vaccine schedule and makes most public announcements about vaccines, and this article is on vaccines, it becomes important to to consider, not just with this Nation article, but with any media article and especially those extolling vaccines.
In looking into the measles outbreak connected to Disneyland which has become a trigger for numerous bills across the country to remove vaccine exemptions and mass media encouragement of mandated vaccination for the entire country, it turns out there is also a connection between Disney and the CIA. In addition, the CIA has been involved in vaccine teams in Pakistan and with Save the Children which are associated with killing children with vaccines.
So, to ask whether this Nation article full of such praise of vaccines may be related to CIA is a reasonable beginning for thinking as dispassionately and broadly as possible about the article, which itself is a panagyric to vaccines as well as an extensive attack on a doctor who questioned one of them.
[The Nation paragraphs will be marked by "TN" to differentiate it from inserted other passages.]
Mennonite girls gather at the health and safety clinic in Ohio (AP/Tom E. Puskar)
Photographs suggest things. They do not prove things. At first glance, what does it suggest to you?
Beginning with the photograph
The article purports to show Mennonite girls. The Amish and Mennonites are closely related in their customs. For those who have been following issues of vaccines for any length of time, the Amish are significant nationally because for the most part they do not allow their children to be vaccinated, and quite distinct from the rest of the US population, they also have an extraordinarily low level of autism. This has been an uncomfortable fact for those promoting vaccines as well as the fact that Amish children are also healthier than American children most of whom are vaccinated. Those healthy Amish children have become testimony to an undeniable fact - that vaccines are not actually needed for health - and the absence of autistic children among non-vaccinated Amish children keeps a fire burning under questions about vaccines' connection to autism.
Given that the Amish are people who typically don't vaccinate, and they are physically indistinguishable from Mennonites who still use horses and buggies, it's interesting that the author of the article chose this picture of these children outside a health clinic, next to a sign for an MMR vaccine clinic. Are the children there for vaccines? Or are the children just waiting on someone inside the clinic who could be there for any of the myriad reasons people go to health clinics?
The photo certainly suggests that the children are there for the vaccines, but in being under the title about an anti- vax movement, the photo somehow does double duty and also suggests to anyone just glancing at the photo, that this is what anti-vax people look like - rural, religious, in a word, less educated.
The Nation readers will have to think for themselves how they reacted to the photograph and what it said to them, as well about what biases they come in with about families who don't vaccinate their children or who protest against mandates.
Looking at the title of the article: "What the Anti-Vax Movement Doesn't Tell You About Measles"
Bias
The title could instill prejudice - that is, pre-judgement - in the Nation readers against people they don't know, before they even begin to read the article. And prejudice is just that, a judgment of a group of people we don't actually know personally. Perhaps it also instills a bit of paranoia since "these people" are said to be hiding something from "you," but then again, perhaps paranoia or fear may be a common element of all prejudice. Did the title have any pre-judging impact on you, The Nation reader?
Mislabeling
The author, in using the term "anti-vax movement," has applied a highly inaccurate label. It doesn't fit people who have many different issues concerning vaccines, many of whom are vaccinate their children out of their own belief that vaccines have value. Others would like their children vaccinated but simply want to decide how many and which and when. Others are seeking vaccine safety, and want independent testing of vaccines outside the influence of the vaccine manufacturers. Others think that vaccines should be green - nothing but the antigen and sterile water. Others think vaccines in general, even green ones, overwhelm the immune system of developing children and weaken it and shouldn't be taken at all. Others see a profit motive in seeding children with various viruses, heavy metals, mycoplasma (lecture on mycoplasma by one of the leading cell biologists in the world), etc. Still others see a depopulation agenda at play since the Rockefellers who helped financed genocide of millions during WWII with IG Farben, are deeply involved. Others are impressed by studies such as the one below showing vaccinated children have 2 to 5 times more diseases than unvaccinated children and just want their children to be that healthy. http://healthimpactnews.com/2011/new-study-vaccinated-children-have-2-to-5-times-more-diseases-and-disorders-than-unvaccinated-children/
So, "anti-vax" is collective misnomer for a very group of people who are thinking about vaccines from very many and different angles. What all of those people have in common, though, is a common rejection of any and all vaccine mandates. They would more accurately be called "anti-Vaccine Mandates." As the government and corporations have suddenly begun a coordinated push for vaccine mandates, they appear to have stimulated increasing number of Americans to resent that control.
When a USA Today columnist called for the arrest and imprisonment of parents who don't vaccinate their children and offered an accompanying poll, 92% of readers voted against mandated vaccines. Doctors are coming out against vaccine mandates as well.
http://www.whale.to/vaccine/aaps.html
When NY mandated H1N1 vaccines for health care workers and teachers, the mandate brought together the Public Employees Federation, and New York State United Teachers in a lawsuit against the state, groups that are not necessarily opposed to vaccines in general. But the government's current attempt to remove rights around health choices will be bringing many groups together. If there is a movement growing now against vaccine mandates, as there appears to be, the government, the corporations seeking it and the media promoting it, have given birth to it.
Parents, though, are simply concerned to prevent harm to their children, which vaccines do cause, and in many forms, only three pictured here:
Unlike government or vaccine corporations or the media, the parents and now many others who do not vaccine (or any other health) mandates, have no financial stake in this issue, other than fear of being destroyed financially were someone in their family damaged. They are concerned for their own and their children's health.
Grassroots
The people who are concerned about vaccines (from whatever angle), are in fact, the grassroots. These are the very people that progressives typically care about - people speaking out at great risk to say their children have been or may be harmed by international corporations, people who are saying they are vulnerable and made helpless by the capture of US agencies such as the FDA and CDC by the vaccine corporations.
For many different reasons, people are essentially fighting the power of the multinational corporations on behalf of their families, around life and death issues. If that's not grassroots, it's hard to think who would better qualify.
Progressives can "meet" a few of the people the Nation mislabels as the anti-vax movement
Does the Nation's title set these grassroots people up as "other" to you, or even as a threat? Are they people to be dismissed as wrong even before you begin reading?
The photo that accompanies the article may make you as readers believe you have a sense of the people involved. But do you?
In an effort to do things a bit differently, a video of a public hearing in Massachusetts has been included here so The Nation readers who want to get a real sense of some of the people involved, can do so for themselves. The Nation readers who live in Massachusetts would be "meeting" their neighbors.
This is an attempt to help bring you readers together with others, around what is in fact a major national and international controversy involving a corporate technology, with bills showing up across the country to force that technology, dangerous or not, on everyone. Up until now, government agencies and media have guided public thinking - including demonizing concerned parents and creating divisiveness even in families - while those controlling pharma have decided public policy behind the scenes. But the technology has come under such huge question now, that it requires a great public discussion and an open source investigation by as many people as possible.
So, The Nation readers can begin with meeting some people in Massachusetts at a public hearing who have concerns about vaccination as well as about information on vaccine injuries being suppressed.
This is a long introduction to the analysis of The Nation article but it is necessary in order to deal with the extreme bias set up around this issue which makes it hard for Americans to hear each other at a time when they most need to - when any are in pain. Progressives care about other people and justice but the issue of vaccines has been so swamped by prejudice, divisiveness and fear that it is hard to see what is going on.
To the extent any analysis here helps to dispel prejudice, divisiveness and fear, it will be good. To the extent that people are then freed to engage with their full intelligence and abilities in this crucial national discussion over rights, health, and power, that brings us closer to being a just country run by people, not corporations.
The Nation article itself will be next in this series
This is a short course in vitamin C. Don't get out your pencils and paper, just enjoy the films and imagine all that vitamin C can do for you and your family and friends.
Here is the explanation for why vitamin C can stop, reverse or cure all degenerative diseases, infections, all viruses, all toxins, and even radiation poisoning. And it's just so simple. In a moment, the endless complexity and confusion of modern medicine is reducing down to utter elegant simplicity. The truth of why it works becomes obvious .... and fear-dissolving.
This is what a vitamin C cure looks like, and as will be obvious it's not piddling. For conventional doctors, though, it defies medical belief and is threatening. For the rest of us, it's great fun to watch the unbelievable become real. 60 Minutes did a great segment.
This lecture followed that cure in New Zealand. The first little part is in "New Zealandish" so might be hard to understand but the rest is in American.
Here are excellent videos for professionals, and for everyone else.
To a group of Standard medical doctors
To a group of Alternative physicians
Now, having seen all that and no longer a newbie and way ahead of almost all physicians in the country, nay, the world, here is why vitamin C is a cure for ebola and how to dose it.
The pharmaceutical industry is using vaccines to shoot GMOs into people's DNA "seeking DNA uptake". If they get it - and in the US they have over 70 chances because of all the (GMO) vaccines that children must - they are genetically changing them. The vaccine manufacturers are genetically engineering America's children
They are doing this to kids' worldwide and with some really disturbing stuff.
This is a whole new angle on vaccines and one the corporations can't defend against because they can't deny it. It's in all the science journals. They even say it clearly in Wikipedia. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DNA_vaccination
They call them "DNA" vaccines but what they really are, are GMO vaccines because that is what is being shot into the child. They aim at the DNA but they shoot GMOs.
Using the term "GMO vaccines" could bring together two huge and growing movements that are actually closely related - the anti-vaccine movement and the anti-GMO movement - to demand that food and people themselves be left as nature had intended, rather than being screwed up genetically and will toxins added on top of that. With sick soil and sick environment and sick people now so visible, those separate two pennies might drop and people might realize the connection to one thing - GMOs. We've known the biotech industry has put fish DNA into tomatoes and other such strange species crossing is occurring, but it's not occurred to us that the very same thing was being done to human children.
It seems that people have already been genetically engineered. Dr. Joseph Cummins, professor emeritus of biology at the University of Western Ontario, says "It seems likely that the transplants are going on, but very, very quietly in a regulatory vacuum, perhaps.”
Genetically-Engineered Humans. Barritt, Jason A., et al. “Mitochondria in Human Offspring Derived From Ooplasmic Transplantation.” Human Reproduction, 16.3 (2001), pp 513-6. •
“First Cases of Human Germline Genetic Modification Announced.” British Medical Journal 322 (12 May 2001), p 1144. •
“Genetically Modified Human Babies?” Australian Broadcasting Corporation, 8 May 2001. • Hawes, S.M., C. Sapienza, and K. E. Latham.
“Ooplasmic Donation in Humans: The Potential for Epigenic Modifications.” Human Reproduction 17.4 (2002), 850-2. • Hill, Amelia.
“Horror at ‘Three Parent Foetus’ Gene Disorders.” Observer (London), 20 May 2001.
Blinded by fear of disease and "trust" in what they were told by "experts," people of the world have let the criminally corrupt pharmaceutical industry shoot GMOs into children and adults's DNA.
There are many, many articles on the internet on pharmaceutical corruption but this one from the Office of Medical Justice is especially telling for what is missing - all the videos there have been shut down. There were from CNBC, from doctors, from pharma drug reps and sale managers, from drug industry insiders, attempting to tell the truth. It is not hard to guess who is responsible for shut down. It speaks louder than words.
This is the industry that starting within hours after birth, is shooting GMOs composed of foreign species' DNA into the pristine human DNA of tiny infants. Over and over and over again, doctors, following the the pharmaceutical industry-controlled CDC's vaccination schedule, are forcing GMO vaccines composed of animal, insect, and virus DNA, into the DNA of infants, toddlers, children, and now increasingly into the DNA of high school and college students - GMO vaccines that are sickening, crippling and killing.
But now the world has to face a MONSTROUS realization: something much, much larger than illness, crippling and deaths from vaccines is going on.
GMO vaccines are altering and contaminating the human genetics of the world.
Once that reality is taken in, the entire world must begin to plumb the depths of what is occurring.
If the vaccine industry is shooingt pig DNA into a child and there is "DNA uptake," that means the child now has genetics from pigs.
People's genetic heritage is their unique and priceless intellectual property. Did any parent sign a contract agreeing to have their children's DNA, their human genetic heritage going back millennia, wrecked by the insertion of pig DNA?
On a social level, what will it mean for an Orthodox Jewish family to take in that the sons and daughters they have so obediently been taking to the doctor for vaccines, now have pig DNA in them? That their children are now RELATED by their genes to pigs?
Who did that to them? The same pharmaceutical industry that put Hitler into office (with help from the Rockefellers who run the CDC, and the CIA) and killed Jews out of disgust at them.
What will it mean for Muslims? They, too, like many Jews, refuse to eat pork because it is considered filthy. Now their children contain the DNA of pigs. And how will this impact those Hindus who don't take in meat of any kind, for their children to have the DNA of pigs?
What does that mean on a spiritual level for those religions?
And on a biologic level? What in God's name happens when children grow up and marry someone else who also has pig DNA and they have children? How will that pig DNA express itself in their children? Or the insect DNA, or all the virus DNA? If close relatives are not supposed to marry because it's bad to do so genetically in case there are any problematic genes that will be reinforced, what does it mean for children around the whole world who share the exact same GMO-damaged DNA by virtue of getting the same GMO vaccines?
Parents have always been able to look at the family of whoever their children were marrying to see if there were lunacy in the family or congenital disfigurements or various diseases. But GMO vaccine corruption of human genetics with other species is new in the history of the world, so no one has any way of knowing what the consequences will be for the offspring of those children. We just know already, that the vaccines are having horrific medical consequences for some children who lose the ability to speak, to think, and even for their mitochondrial cells to generate normal energy.
Are those children unable to function because their corrupted human DNA now includes animal DNA, insect DNA, virus DNA and things have ceased working at a very basic level?
Is the profound dysfunctioning of so many children related to the wrecking of their human DNA?
"Children with autism are far more likely to have deficits in their ability to produce cellular energy than are typically developing children, a new study by researchers at UC Davis has found. The study, published in theJournal of the American Medical Association(JAMA), found that cumulative damage and oxidative stress in mitochondria, the cell's energy producer, could influence both the onset and severity of autism, suggesting a strong link between autism and mitochondrial defects. .... Mitochondria are the primary source of energy production in cells and carry their own set of genetic instructions, mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA), to carry out aerobic respiration. Dysfunction in mitochondria already is associated with a number of other neurological conditions, including Parkinson's disease, Alzheimer's disease, schizophrenia ...." http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2010/11/101130161521.htm
Mitochondrial disorders may be caused by mutations, acquired or inherited, in mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) or in nuclear genes that code for mitochondrial components. They may also be the result of acquired mitochondrial dysfunction due to adverse effects of drugs, infections, or other environmental causes (see MeSH). ... Defects in nuclear-encoded mitochondrial genes are associated with hundreds of clinical disease phenotypes including anemia, dementia, hypertension, lymphoma, retinopathy, seizures, and neurodevelopmental disorders.[2] [Emphasis added.]
We have been blind and trusting and allowed the vaccine industry to shoot the DNA from pigs and many more species, including insects and viruses, into the normal human DNA of the world's children.
Have we lost our minds?
Suddenly so many, many parents reporting their children's incessant high-pitched screaming after being injected with vaccines takes on immense significance. One has a hideous image of the DNA of animals and insects supplanting segments of the child's DNA, and the child's very humanness being fractured.
"If you want to prevent SIDS, the one thing you must do is breastfeed with absolutely no bottles of formula 'to top up' - as mothers say. Ridiculous! Never never never give formula." Hilary Butler
Hilary Butler, a mother in New Zealand, using data available to anyone, is opening a door onto the reality of breast milk's stunning power to protect infants and children, a power that far exceeds anything mothers have ever been told.
Nursing one's baby, it turns out, is not just a good thing or a loving thing or a natural thing, it is a miraculous thing medically. Butler is showing through heavy documentation from medical sources, that breast feeding is even a life or death thing - crucial to the baby's survival - particularly if vaccines are involved.
"Interestingly, in my 30 years of working with parents of children who have been damaged after vaccines, by far the worst damage I’ve ever seen, was in formula-fed children. It’s got to the point where, if a mother comes to me wanting help with a child with serious health issues showing up after vaccines, I can pretty much predict the answer to the question, “Is your baby breastfed?”
"Breast milk is NOT just food.
"Breast milk has functions which go far beyond nutrition.
"Breast milk has a dramatic and long term effect not only on the immune system development, but gut flora, allergy, brain development, and other health parameters.
"Breast milk is an immune regulator, a hormone conductor, a bone density wizard and a genetic blueprint scanner.
"It is a gene methylator, and two years of breast milk lays, stabilises and solidifies the core genetic manual of health for your child, for that child’s whole life.
"One bottle of formula is enough to change a baby’s gut dramatically, and it takes two weeks of breastfeeding to return the gut back to normal. (Personal communication, Dr Robert Reisinger) How can this happen? E Coli is the main culprit. This bacteria is a putrifactive protein loving bacteria. The protein content of human breast milk is lower than in any other mammal, and the protein content of formula or any other milk supplement has a direct influence on the numbers of E Coli in the gut . Not only does the acid gut and very low protein content of breastmilk provide a more hostile environment for E Coli, but breastmilk also contain neutralising factors against E Coli.
"Several studies have shown that babies who died of SIDS have a high prevalence of E Coli in the flora of the gut. Some suggest that the E coli "have acquired a plasmid which confers toxigenicity" (Med J Aust, 1989, Vol 151, pg 538) But E. Coli is intrinsically toxic. The outer coating (lipopolysaccharide) is the toxic component, but the key to the toxicity level is the speed with which it can multiply, given the right circumstances. These factors include bottle feeding (which results in more gram negative bacteria, and a protein and alkaline level favouring E Coli), stress, overheating, viruses, vitamin deficiencies AND the suppressive actions of vaccines on the reticuloendothelial system." [Emphasis added.]
Many mothers have trusted what the government has said, that SIDS results from putting babies down on their stomachs, and is not about vaccines, and point to vaccines increasing and yet SIDS starting to go down after families began putting babies down on their backs. The problem is that reduction in SIDS as vaccines were increasing, based on a statistical trick.
"According to the Miller/Goldman study, SIDS deaths have increased in a linear fashion with the number of vaccines administered. At 12 vaccines the number of total infant deaths was around 3 per 1000 children. Double the number of vaccines and you almost double the death rate (see this graph for details). These researchers challenge the idea that the SIDS rate dropped in the 1990′s, claiming instead that the dip was due to infant deaths being re-classified as other Sudden Unexpected Infant Deaths and later Shaken Baby Syndrome (which is thought to be vaccine-induce encephalitis)." [Emphasis added along with an article on the biomechanics of Shaken Baby Syndrome - Shaken Baby Syndrome: actual innocence petition by Kent R. Holcomb]
If mothers add together the deaths from SIDS and the new category - SUID - they can see how many babies die each year of "unexplained" deaths. Many of the deaths are closely related in timing to the administration of vaccines, and all infant deaths have risen, as the Miller/Goldman study indicates, with the imposition of more and more vaccines.
While it may be shocking to think the government would create a false picture of vaccine deaths by simply dividing the deaths into additional categories, a similar statistical trick with diagnostic categories was used with polio, from the very beginning. To promote the introduction of the polio vaccine, polio was made to appear a terrible threat by lumping cases of paralysis from other sources together (aseptic meningitis and Coxsackie virus paralysis were combined polio data). After the polio vaccine came out, the other diseases were stripped away from polio cases, so "polio" appeared to dramatically decrease. From The Polio Game:
“Polio cases were predetermined to decrease when the medical definition of polio was changed. Cases of polio were more often reported as aseptic meningitis after the vaccine was introduced, skewing efficacy rates. Source: The Los Angeles County Health Index: Morbidity and Mortality, Reportable Diseases.
“The fact that dubious tactics were used to fabricate efficacy rates was corroborated by Dr. Bernard Greenberg, chairman of the Committee on Evaluation and Standards of the American Public Health Association during the 1950s. .... simply by changes in diagnostic criteria, the number of paralytic cases was predetermined to decrease… [52:96,97]”
A large scale alteration of numbers that would indicate a complete failure of vaccines and their causing the disease they are meant to prevent, is occurring in Asia right now, where 47,500 cases of vaccine-induced polio were reclassified by the WHO as "non-polio" paralysis. The WHO is hiding the falsity and grave harm from Bill Gates' vaccine campaign while generating a myth that polio is being eradicated, when it is being spread by the vaccines.
But what are mothers supposed to think when governments say "vaccines are safe and diseases are terrifying"? Most do not know that polio was never a scourge or that it was being fulled cured and quickly in 1949? Do they know the same substance has been proven to cure over 70 infectious diseases - all the ones mothers are told they should fear - or that the FDA is working with the pharmaceutical industry to put that cure out of reach? Mothers can do research as Butler has done, and they can do what mothers have always done - talk to each other, and listen with open hearts to other mothers whose families have been affected, rather than to Bill Gates who has said the those who even question vaccine safety are killing children.
At this point, we know that the government is not telling the truth about many things. A significant government falsehood which relates to vaccines, is the number of annual deaths from flu. They are not 36,000 as the CDC has said, but 18 (and that 18 is not even certain). On the basis of that CDC 200000% exaggeration, flu shots which potentially cause infertility and certainly fetal deaths, were pushed on the public and are being mandated, while the EU and Canada have suspended its use because it doesn't work. Thanks to a woman researcher who used Freedom of Information in the UK, we know that the government there has been lying to the public about vaccines (the same ones given in the US) for over 30 years. They have hidden the facts that vaccines don't work, that they cause the diseases they are supposed to prevent, that they contain hazards, and that the government and the vaccine industry are lying to the public about the reality of vaccines are lying to the public about the reality of vaccines and have colluded to prevent safety studies that would expose those lies.
While all of this has been going on, nursing mothers have been quietly protecting and strengthening their children's immune system so the children can successfully fight off diseases themselves.
It is in this context that one sees the extraordinary thing Hilary Butler is doing in exposing that breast milk protects against SIDS because she is offering mothers something real they can actually do to protect their babies. She has changed the discussion about breast feeding or bottle feeding from one of "just personal choice" to one of profound medical seriousness. Mothers, in knowing the extreme immunologic requirement that infants and children have for breast milk, will not choose convenience over the life of their child. Nor will mothers remain silent in letting other mothers know how much is at stake.
Until now, how many mothers have had even the slightest idea how starkly biologically different breast feeding and bottle feeding are? Or ever heard anyone, with a grounding in the science of those differences, say adamantly to never, never, never give formula, not even one bottle?
[Butler reports at as early as 1974,] "Dr Robert Reisinger presented a paper at an International SIDS conference. He quoted many authors who foundSIDS predominantly among bottle-fed babies. Included in the authors quoted (but not referenced) was Shirley Tonkin from New Zealand:
"Tonkin reported that in her series of 86 SIDS cases, only two were breast-fed. Since twenty-five percent of her control population were breast fed, she should have had 21 cases of SIDS in breast-fed infants if the risk were the same in both breast-fed and bottle-fed."
"Coombs stated that if SIDS were relatively as common in the breast-fed as in the bottle-fed infant he should have had 17 breast-fed cases in his series, whereas at that time he had not one." [Emphasis added.]
And things have gone downhill with formula since then. For at that time, in 1974, there was no genetic engineering of crops. Then the relation between bottle feeding and SIDS was based on formula lacking the protective quality of breast milk and disrupting the gut flora. But now, unless organic, commercial baby formula is toxic by virtue of using genetically engineered ingredients - from milk from cows injected with a genetically modified bovine growth hormone which is linked to breast cancer, or milk from cows eating genetically modified corn, soy or canola associated with infertility and miscarriages or spontaneous abortions, or from soy linked to causing sterility and infant mortality in hamsters. New Zealand is seeking to ban soy baby formula.
What is there about breast milk that can make such a difference?
Butler points out that
"The immune system of a breast-fed baby functions differently to that of a bottle-fed baby. One of the foremost researchers into breast-feeding, and its effects on the immune system is Dr Catherina Svanborg at Lund University in Sweden. A recent article in DISCOVER described her work as follows:
“.... she and her group had studied the nature and function of epithelial cells, the gut-lining cells that come into contact with breast milk in nursing infants. And they experimented with mothers’ milk many times. They had shown that it does a terrific job of blocking infection by pneumococcus bacteria, the cause of pneumonia, and that breast-fed children suffer significantly fewer ear and upper respiratory tract infections than babies who don’t nurse. They traced down studies showing that breast milk also protects against cancer (the relative risk of childhood lymphoma is nine times higher in bottle-fed infants), and the risk for carcinoma is also elevated.”
“In August 1995 they announced that breast milk kills cancer cells and pinpointed the killer, which turned out to be one of the most abundant proteins in the milk. It’s called alpha-lactalbumin (alpha lac for short), and it helps produce lactose, the sugar found in milk.”
Butler says that "The key to the explanation of how breastmilk kills cancer lies in the breakneck reproduction of the cells lining an infant’s gut which can proliferate out of control, or never fully mature or stabilize, lurking in the system like time bombs, ever ready to burst forth into tumours. According to Dr Svanborg, alpha-lac;"
“targets not only cancer cells but all kinds of immature, rapidly growing cells, and leaves mature stable cells alone.”
Butler highlights even more wonders of breast milk.
"DISCOVER mentions another key to the equation, a “mysterious” factor in breast-milk which along with the acid level of the milk solution, causes a shape-shift, and transforms alpha-lac into HAMLET (Human Alpha-lactalbumin Made Lethal to Tumor cells) which will be the subject of a future medical article from Lund University. The team is now exploring how to turn HAMLET into a usable treatment for cancer and bacterial infections.
"Along with all that, they confirmed that not only was breastmilk related to possible enhancement of cognitive development, it also protected the baby from [the following protections have been put in list form to accentuate how much breastmilk does]:
diarrhoa,
lower respiratory infections,
otitis media,
bacteremia,
bacterial meningitis,
urinary tract infection,
necrotizing enterocolitis,
sudden infant death syndrome,
insulin-dependent diabetes mellitus,
Crohn’s disease,
colitis, and
allergic diseases."
The immune system impact, Butler considers most significant:
"More importantly, breast-feeding may induce an infant’s immune system to mature more quickly that that of a formula-fed child, and the intestines develop faster in newborns that nurse on mothers’ milk. The article further states that the only babies who should not be breastfed are babies who inherit a condition called galactosemia, and whose mothers have TB or HIV. (DISCOVER June 1999, pages 70 –75). The most important statement to understand is this":
“Because the lining of the gut, a prime meeting point between the inside of the body and the hazards of the outside world, is a headquarters of the immune system, the vigilance may help the child’s immune defenses develop.” Pgs 72-73. [That is, it is valuable for the child to have to cope with viruses and bacteria, which provide the learning required by the immune system.]
Butler points to more research on breast feeding and its substantial, unique, and numerous protective effects:
“We conclude that breastfeeding is prophylactic against atopic disease – including atopic eczema, food allergy, and respiratory allergy – throughout childhood and adolescence” (Lancet 1995;346: 1065-69)
“Human milk is rich in protective proteins which play a part in the prevention of microbial infection in suckling infants. These include IgA, lactoferrin, lysozyme, antiproteases, complement, and many other factors.” (Arch Dis child 1998;87:235-239)
“Children who are not breast fed tend to have weaker immune systems and are at greater risk from infectious diseases” (BMJ, 1999, Volume 318, pg 688)
“Breastfeeding may, in addition to the well-known passive protection against infections during lactation, have a unique capacity to stimulate the immune system of the offspring possibl[y] with several long-term positive effects” (Ann Allergy Asthma Immunol 1998; 81: 523-537
"Breastfed babies have a better inteferon~ y production (marker of Th1 response) than bottle-fed babies (Annals of Allergy, Asthma and Immunology, 1998, Volume 81, pg 527) Anti-idiotypic antibodies as well as T and B lymphocytes are transferred via the milk and seem to actively stimulate the immune system of the offspring – numerous anti-inflammatory factors, cytokines and growth factors in the milk might also direct the immune system of the infants with lasting effects. (pg 529)
Butler's articles, in bringing this scientific information to mothers, is exposing breast feeding as being of immense as well as pivotal health importance. She is thus raising breast feeding far beyond the vapidity of "personal choice" to absolute biologic necessity. Butler has helped to show that breast feeding is a biologic sine qua non. For nothing else has such a critical and powerfully beneficial effect on the health of a human being for their entire life as breast feeding. That raises breast feeding to a place of grandeur, medically.
That a breast feeding mother can through her breast milk alone protect her child from birth from a long list of diseases and set the course of her child's health for life as well, is spectacular. Breast feeding has deserved to be heralded not just by families and all of society but by science itself. But breastfeeding mothers have never had that acclaim. Worse, in the absence of awareness of what breastfeeding is actually doing to protect from diseases, and how vaccines interfere, the world has been grossly misled into believing vaccines are "immunizing" children (even as vaccines are damaging children's immune systems). And mothers have unwittingly used baby formula, which is literally harmful. One result has been SIDS.
That said, it would be grossly unfair to mothers who have used formula to blame them for not breast feeding. For even mothers who have some idea that breast milk is more beneficial than baby formula, have had no inkling that breast milk is an imperative for orchestrating and setting the life-long course of the immune system of their baby . This momentous information has been absent, along with information on the severe negative effects of baby formula.
So, though nursing is gaining in popularity, most mothers are deciding whether or not to breast feed within a context in which they lack the most vitalinformation possible. They do not know "the choice" is between a normal, highly functioning and life-long immune system, or an immune system thrown toward disease and autoimmunity. Instead, mothers and future mothers are left deciding based on cultural issues, issues of closeness to the baby, issues of work schedules and convenience, issues of their comfort level with nursing itself - denigrated for decades by the medical community - issues of their family or friends' support, issues of accepting breasts as separate from sexuality, issues of current fashion, etc.
They aren't being told the truth: Breast milk is the key to regulating what their child needs to survive biologic assaults (including vaccines) and live. Butler says:
"The only neonatal immune system primed today in the correct way is a fully-breast-fed unvaccinated baby." [Emphasis added.]
Three things are involved here - priming, priming correctly, and not being vaccinated.
1. Bottle feeding doesn't prime the immune system: Butler says: "Lets be quite blunt here. Breastfeeding not only provides immunity within the milk to many things, it develops, primes and matures the immune system. Bottle-feeding does not."
2. Vaccines negatively affect the immune system, throwing it off course.
From Immunology Today and Modern Vaccinology:
“Modern vaccinations, fear of germs and [o]bsession with hygiene are depriving the immune system of the information input upon which it is dependent. This fails to maintain the correct cytokine balance and fine-tune T-cell regulation, and may lead to increased incidences of allergies and autoimmune diseases.” (Immunology Today, 1998, Vol 19, No 3 pg 113)
“Redirection of the immune response following immunization appears to be a fundamental problem ....” Pg 112, “Modern Vaccinology”, By Edouard Kurstak, Pub. 1994.
3. Contracting childhood diseases helps prime the immune system.
From Immunology Today:
“Vaccination replaces recovery from infections with a rather different type of immunological stimulus. ... In the measles system [for instance], both vaccination and the infection itself have profound and long-lasting effects on the immune system, but these effects are not the same.”
“For example, recovery from natural measles infection reduces the incidence of atopy ["a predisposition toward developing certain allergic hypersensitivity reactions" ], and of allergic reactions to house dust mite to half the incidence seen in vaccinated children, suggesting a systemic and non-specific switch to Th1 activity.”
“indeed learning (immunological) is an absolute necessity, and these systems have evolved in the “anticipation” of appropriate inputs provided in an appropriate sequence after birth, and continuing throughout life” [Emphasis added.Comment added: The "inputs provided in an appropriate sequence," are a reference to childhood diseases.]
Mothers need to know this much science - Th1 immunity is good. Th2 immunity is bad.
"The immune system has two “sides”. One is Th1, which is the usual response to diseases caught naturally. A healthy immune system has a “bias” towards Th1. Th2 is the “other” side, and people who have allergies, asthma and disease with an auto-immune origin have what is known as a Th2-skewed immune system. (New England J. Med 1992, Vol 326, No 5, 298-304 was one of the first references, now there are hundreds).
"When a mother is pregnant, her pregnancy is controlled by cytokines, and requires a predominance of Th2 cytokines in order not to reject the baby. (Acta Paediatra 1997; 86: 916-918) A “Th1 driven” immune system would treat the baby as a graft, thereby miscarrying. Drugs are used to suppress the immune systems of transplant recipients for the same reason.
"When a baby is born, it’s immune system is initially Th2-skewed, by virtue of the mother’s immune system. The mother’s immune system changes very quickly, and her breastmilk will help to change the baby’s balance, and will also “buffer” and assist in the development of the baby’s immune system." [Emphasis added. And the comment: baby formula will not support the baby in this crucial change.]
"The first years of life [is] the time when the “difference” between “vaccine” and “natural” immunity is so important, because most diseases promote a Th1 immunity. The portal of entry, and learning pathways teaches and matures the immune system, and helps in the prevention of both allergy-development" and auto-immune disease. The “antigen” is processed, with the help of immunological factors in breastmilk and the baby’s cued-in immune system through the mucous membranes and the various “layers” of the immune system, producing an end-point called antibodies." [Emphasis added. And the comment: The baby's immune system experiences the "learning" through exposure to viruses and bacteria, not through vaccination which throws the infant's immune system in the direction of autoimmunity and allergies.]
Even as mothers are learning how much breast milk is central to their child's health, how many know their breast milk contains stem cells or the immense significance of that? Butler again.
"Recently, a Lifenews media article announced more recent finding by Hassiotou, that indeed, ... breast milk has stem cells by the truck load. Even more spectacularly, these stem cells are identical to embryonic stem cells, so that there is no need for scientists to use ethically questionable aborted babies.
"Naturally, the focus of the medical system appears to be .... harvesting breastmilk for drug companies.... because...... "Human breast milk may be more than just nourishment for newborns. It may contain hope for a multitude of diseases. Hope that does not require the destruction of innocent human life".
"Hassiotou et al, have not figured out what stem cells in breastmilk are all about in terms of benefits to the baby, but they must suspect some because they say: "Future research should elucidate the role of these cells for the breastfed infant, generating implications for public policy related to early infant nutrition."
Mothers, put in fear about every little thing related to their new babies, are pressured from the very beginning of their pregnancy to think about storing their infant's cord blood (at great cost). As hospitals and drug companies stand to make huge profits from this cord clamping (at enormous cost to the infants) Butler has a message for mothers who are confused about what is best for their new baby:
".... cord blood should not be stored, because the primary reason for stem cells in cord blood is that the baby NEEDS that stem cell transfusion at birth. It's not "medical waste" as it was once called ... it's nature's first stem cell transfusion. These cord blood stem cells can go anywhere in the body, and do anything - because they are pluripotent, and can be used by the body to repair any cells. But only if the baby has them ...."
Mothers are as unaware of the dangers of storing fetal blood versus the necessity of stem cell rich blood going to its owner - the newborn - as they are of the dangers of bottle feeding versus the incomparable medical value of breast feeding. And most have not yet heard that there is yet another life and death difference between breast milk and commercial baby formula. Breast milk has stems cells in it. Bottle feeding lacks stem cells altogether. The astounding stem cell support the infant receives at birth (if the cord is not inappropriately and prematurely clamped) is - equally astoundingly - continued after birth through breast feeding! But with formula, there is nothing that is "pluripotent" or that can "go anywhere in the body, and do anything." Bottle feeding can't "used by the body to repair any cells."
Mothers in the US and around with world are making decisions about breast feeding their babies, while in a separate part of their mind, they are anxious about SIDS and confused about vaccines. They have had no idea these things are related. Whether bottle feeding is a first or second choice for some mothers, whether they are vaccinating or not vaccinating, all new mothers are worried about Sudden Infant Death Syndrome and none has gotten the critical information that bottle feeding and vaccines are strongly associated with it, or that breast feeding can be protective.
Those who are manufacturing vaccines claim vaccines are "miracles of modern medicine," but science is now exposing that vaccines throw off the immunity of those taking them. "Modern medicine" has been killing infants with vaccines promoted as providing immunity. But it has been "traditional" breastfeeding mothers, through doing something biologically normal - nursing their babies - who are the ones stimulating true immunity in their children.
Ironically, mothers delivering breast milk, not doctors injecting vaccines, are the ones preventing diseases and saving lives.
"Your medical choice is about to be usurped by Washington. Legislation is in the works that would nullify your right to decide what medical interventions you wish to accept or reject for your own body.
"Under the recent vaccine hysteria agenda, Washington is now trying to establish a precedent that could order you to do things like donate your organs or submit to experimental vaccines." [Emphasis added.]
People are being genetically engineered with animal species and with truly disgusting other things.
Removal of the right for a human being to say no to having anything injected into them that might cripple or kill them, means removal of people's rights to the most fundamental of all self-defense. Pharma is pushing Congress to make the American people submit themselves and their precious children to potentially being killed.
Here is but one small example of what people would be defending against, a childhood vaccine infamous for causing SIDS.
The Dtap Package InsertPg 11, "Adverse events reported during post-approval use of Tripedia vaccine include idiopathic thrombocytopenic purpura, SIDS [death of an infant], anaphylactic reaction, cellulitis, autism, convulsion/grand mal convulsion, encephalopathy, hypotonia, neuropathy, somnolence and apnea. Events were included in this list because of the seriousness or frequency of reporting." [Emphasis added.] http://regardingcaroline.com/Immune_System.html
But given that GMO vaccines are altering a person's DNA, self defense against GMO vaccines means even more than defending against disease and even death. It means defending and the protecting the very essence of a person's being - their genetic heritage going back millennia. It means defending their DNA purity and defending against their DNA being damaged or corrupted, so that it can be handed down to future generations.
People over thousands of years have known not to intermarry with people who have serious diseases in their blood line (in their DNA). And we are all appalled at a rapist impregnating a woman because her child with then carry his DNA.
A Congressional bill would override the human wisdom of the former and the revulsion of the latter, and allow the pharmaceutical industry to continue literally RAPING the DNA of the children in the US with GMOs and not even with the DNA of other people but of pigs, monkeys, insects, viruses, and even synthetic DNA. [Human DNA is normally acquired via sexual intercourse and a rapist forces their DNA onto another. Pharma has found a new means to rape someone - they do it through "vaccine rape" in which they violently - literally shooting GMO into someone with a "gene gun" - and force foreign DNA from non-human species even, into the human DNA of someone - with their knowledge so against their will. This is rape. It is literally corporate rape.
They claim to be persons. And they have been raping all the children of the US, leaving bizarre DNA in all of them. They have been doing the same to as many adults as they can lure in with lies. Sometimes they offer gifts but mostly they promise "health" as the benefit of the rape.
Forced rape of DNA on a national scale is what planned by Pharma, with Congress as the pimp. And
Though this grotesque plan to make all Americans' bodies subject to the sick genetic "experiments" and even ownership of the criminally corrupt and historically fascist pharmaceutical industry is moving forward in Congress, there is help.
It turns out that Americans have paid for health technology that is being withheld from us. Believe it or not, it is on Mars where Dick Cheney is part of a Mars Colony Corporation. That health technology can cure everyone in the country - autistic kids, amputees, people with cancer, people with multiple sclerosis, diabetes, MS, ALS, Alzheimers, .... you name it.
So while Congress is preparing a health catastrophe for all Americans, turning the entire country over to total control of a fascist pharmaceutical industry, abhorred for their gruesome human experiments including with vaccines, those behind that pharmaceutical industry know there is true health technology that will utterly destroy their industry. So, they are in a rush to take control of people's bodies and must keep that technology hidden.
Because once people across this country know the choice is between absolute and total fascist control over their bodies and that of their children, or absolute and total health, even for those who have suffered for years, there will be massive revolt.
Because the health technology belongs to us.
And Americans really won't tolerate being cheated and harmed any longer.
Here is the information on the health technology. It comes from Newsinsideout.com in a interview conducted by Alfred Labremont Webre (a judge on the Kuala Lumpur War Crimes Tribunal that indicted Bush and Cheney and Israel for war crimes) with Marine Captain Randy Cramer.
"US Marine Capt. Randy A. Cramer, Special Section (ss) is an active duty Marine officer deployed within the civilian population of the United States pursuant to Article 21 of Emergency Marine Corps Regulations. Under authorization from the U.S. Marine Corps chain of command, Capt. Cramer is speaking out against US government policies ....
"Article 21: When the US Marine Corps can warn the public the US government is no longer functioning
Capt. Randy Cramer states he is speaking out in this NewsInsideOut.com interview under authorization of a secret mechanism established by U.S. President Dwight Eisenhower to warn American citizens in the event their government was compromised and in danger of failing them or being overtaken.
"Article 21 of secret Marine Corps regulations authorizes the US Marine chain of command to deploy a U.S. Marine as a civilian to speak out publicly against the actions of the U.S. government when either of two conditions is reached:
Less that 50% of the constitutional guarantees of the US government are in place because of the actions of an extraterrestrial race; or
Less than 75% of the operating functions of the US government are no longer being carried out;
"Under either of these conditions, the U.S. Marine chain of command can invoke Article 21 and deploy a U.S. Marine in the form of Capt. Randy A. Cramer to warn the public as to steps it should take so that the American people and its nation can survive.
"There has been an official determination that one or both of these conditions have been met now.
"U.S. Marine Corps White Hat deployed to save American nation
"Capt. Randy Cramer states straightforwardly that he was authorized under Article 21 by his chain of command to speak out. He says, “When I agreed to speak publicly, my security clearance was raised to a Blue/Gold-13, which has granted me full access to USMC ss intelligence files, and weekly briefings by Brigadier General Julian Smythe, personally.”
Americans can let Congress remove all their rights to protect their own bodies and their children's bodies from harm and let Congress turn all of them over to control of the pharmaceutical industry - an industry which has been genetically altering most American children with vaccines, and which wishes the power now to alter the DNA of everyonein the country, to add ingredient it wishes into vaccines and to force that on people made helpless to refuse. That is, the pharmaceutical industry wishes the power to run human genetic experiments with vaccines without limit and to be able to continue to sicken, sterilize, maim and kill Americans, but now to be able to do it to anyone in the US at will.
Americans can let Congress turn them over to pharmaceutical industry that created AIDS and infected and killed millions of people with it through forced small pox vaccinations campaigns.
Or Americans can come together across all races, ethnic groups, sexual orientations, religious affiliations, and political parties, and secure the release of the health technology they have all paid for, so they can all live extraordinarily healthy and long and happy lives.
Fascism and sickness and death? Or happiness and life?
Choosing life is a question of first seeing in your heart that things can be wonderful. Choosing life is then a question of standing up for what is good for everyone. A place to begin is by informing as many people and groups as you can of the existence of this health technology. Then people must begin calling their congressional representatives, telling them the "Vaccine Saves Lives" is SICK GMO joke since the vaccines are genetically altering anyone who is forced to take them. Then choosing life is a question of demanding the release of the trulylife savinghealth technology Americans paid for and which has been kept from the American public by criminal acts.
How many people do we all know this will help? Stand up for them. Stand up for yourselves. Stand up for a future of happiness for all our children ... and for all of us.
Did you know that the vaccines Congress may mandate for the entire country are GMO vaccines and anyone who gets them is having their DNA altered by them?
The wiki article on DNA vaccination makes that clear. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DNA_vaccination
Pharma is using just the same method as Monsanto uses to genetically alter seeds - randomly shooting GMOs into the seeds DNA with a gene gun, and hoping for "DNA uptake."
With all the new children's "DNA" vaccines, the same thing occurs. GMOs are shot into the child's DNA, with Pharma hoping for "DNA uptake."
DNA uptake means that GMOs have become part of the child's DNA.
If that occurs, the child then has three parents - 1. the father who contributed his unique DNA, 2. the mother who contributed her unique DNA, and 3. the pharmaceutical industry that contributed unknown GMOs of other DNA strands to the child.
Incredibly, corporations in contributing DNA strands become a third "parent" genetically. And what DNA strands is this non-living corporate parent contributing? They can come from swine, monkeys, poultry, insects, viruses and even can be synthetic (not from nature but wholly man-made). This entirely alien DNA for human beings, becomes the child's genetic heritage.
What's more, given how many vaccines the children are forced to get, more and more of this animal, insect, virus, and fake DNA is being forced into the child's human DNA.
Pharma created and is behind pushing agricultural GMOs which include bizarre mixes of DNA that alter characteristics of plants. To do that, it is lying, subverting laws and undermining democratic rights. It is RIGHT NOW preventing labeling of those GMO, is preventing real testing of them, and is producing ever more GMOs, with public protests unheard.
Pharma also created and is behind pushing GMO vaccines that include bizarre mixes of DNA from from swine, monkeys, poultry, insects, viruses and synthetic biology. To do that, it is lying, subverting laws and undermining democratic rights. It is RIGHT NOW pushing to get its GMO vaccines mandated by Congress. They will also be UNKNOWN and UNTESTED and if Congress passes the bill to mandate vaccines for the entire country - to use force to inject them into the American public - this Congress will be opening the door to at least 200 vaccines already waiting, with public protests over vaccines unheard.
If Congress passes the bill to mandate vaccines, any vaccine can then be used at will by Pharma, for Congress with have let corporate will crush human will. In doing so, Congress will have eliminated the human rights to self-protection, the human right to save one's own and one's children's DNA.
Pharma's push for such power over human beings is essentially a push for removal of human beings' rights to defend their bodies from whatever Pharma wishes to insert into them, to do whatever Pharma wishes to them.
There is a hidden FDA rule inserted by Pharma that would all them to do anything at all with vaccines. Under that rule, new ingredients can be put into vaccines with the approval of only one person at the FDA. No testing is required. The vaccines will then be both UNTESTED and UNKNOWN.
If Congress passes the current Pharma bill, thinking they are mandating the current vaccines, they would in fact be mandating UNTESTED and UNKNOWN vaccines. The vaccine manufacturers have already removed their own liability. Now they want to remove all rights that stop them from forcing whatever they wish into everyone in the country.
Be sure to read the following article which explains in detail about the hidden FDA rule and how it would allow Pharma put into vaccines whatever it wants, and describes some of the horrific things Pharma has already been pushing to include. There would be no limits.
The country needs to face the fact that the new VACCINES ARE ALL GMO vaccines, and America's children are being genetically altered. This is true of anyone else being injected with vaccines now as well. When people line up for the flu shot, they are in fact lining to have their DNA altered, and in unknown ways.
Is it easier to alter a fetus's DNA, just as it's easier to alter a seed than a plant? Is this why vaccines are being so heavily pushed on pregnant women?
Is Pharma so focused on unvaccinated children (who are many times healthier than vaccinated children) and attacking their parents so ferociously because it wants to get its hands on all those who have not yet been genetically altered?
This effort by Pharma to reach ALL children worldwide is not what media and government agencies say of it: "Vaccines are saving the lives of billions of children around the world." Quite the opposite is occurring. UNICEF and Save the Children and the Gates Foundation are maiming and killing children in huge numbers with vaccines. This is so obvious to people in Africa and Asia that they have gone from decades of hiding their children to now starting to kill vaccine teams coming near their villages.
Many people in the country are aware the CDC and FDA are lying about the effectiveness and the safety of the vaccines. They see kids who are vaccinated getting the diseases they were vaccinated for. They know friends or neighbors whose kids became horrible ill after taken vaccines, some of whom were mentally crippled, some of whom died.
But after an outbreak of measles in which most of those who got sick had been vaccinated, though there have been no measles deaths since 2003 and there have been over 100 measles vaccine deaths, Congress is pushing (having been pushed by Pharma) to pass a bill to remove vaccine exemptions, so people will have no way out.
The lies about vaccines, floating the idea of imprisoning parents who do not want their children vaccinated, the coercion by doctors, the bullying of media, even taking people's children from them. seems not to have been enough to overcome people's concern about vaccines. As this brute approach to vaccines backfires, pharma becomes more totalitarian in its methods. If lies won't get you to vaccinate and if threats won't, then removing your right to decide what can or cannot be injected into your child, is the ticket, apparently.
Congress probably believes it would be removing exemptions from the current vaccines.
But if one looks at what Big Pharma put in place at the FDA a few year ago, it's clear they have gamed everything about vaccines.
A little rule change Pharma got inserted at the FDA (which they control) "allows" the FDA to add any ingredient to vaccines, without any testing, and by the approval of only one person.
Look at that again. They can put anything into vaccines, anytime. This means that a tested vaccine that have been approved, becomes a different vaccine by virtue of being changed. But it doesn't have to be tested and would go out to doctors and the public as though it were a tested vaccine.
What ingredients might be added?
They could include ingredients people have been fighting to stop. They could put thimerasol (mercury) back in and in any amount. They could put in squalene in "murderous" doses, such as was planned for the swine flu vaccine - 1 million times more than was used in the vaccines that caused Gulf War Syndrome. They could put in nanochips for tracking people.
The sky's the limit.
And they can keep adding ingredient after ingredient, all they want. They could make any sort of vaccine to do anything.
And though they may be fundamentally changing the vaccine, they could continue to call the vaccine the "measles" vaccine or the MMR vaccine but no one would know they were actually a different vaccine. And those "new" untested vaccines would be forced on every child in the US, with parents believing they were getting the regular vaccine. And the "new" untested vaccine could be forced many times - for pharma sets the "ideal" schedule - and if exemptions are lost, there is no means to stop them.
To achieve total sterility in animals, three of one kind of vaccine are given over a few months. Interestingly, Gardasil, already associated with destruction of the ovaries, is also given in threes, in a similarly short time frame. Currently, many girls refuse to get the full series because they become ill after one or two. But if there are no exemptions, the pharmaceutical industry can force such things, including even on infants who are more easily harmed.
Again, the name of the vaccine would remain the same, but the vaccine itself would be very different.
Gardasil, for instance, could be hidden inside the HEP B vaccine given to babies at birth and then afterwards. Giving the vaccine so early might have powerful even if delayed effects.
While hiding one vaccine inside another sounds preposterous, it is just what was done with the H1N1 vaccine - which had been mostly avoided by the public. The pharmaceutical industry hide it in the current seasonal vaccine. The CDC put out no announcement. Doctors have not been telling anyone, nor have any pharmacies or other locations where flu shots are so aggressively pushed. That the H1N1 had a 700% increase in miscarriages makes hiding that vaccine from pregnant women and then the CDC pushing pregnant women to take the flu vaccine with the H1N1 vaccine hidden inside, disturbing, to say the least.
Many do not know that Pharma put Hitler into office. The Rockefellers had half interest in those companies. When the German armies occupied a country, they always mandated vaccines. In this way, Pharma made a fortune and they killed hundreds of thousands of people per country. They used untested and UNKNOWN vaccines. Those companies are 20 times larger today and the Rockefellers control the CDC and WHO, medical schools, research institutes, media, medical journals, etc.
For a very, very small look at what pharma has been doing with vaccines that mainstream media is not covering, and to get a sense of how many children Pharma is crippling or killing with vaccines without suspending the vaccines in question, but rather denying any problems and pushing the suspect vaccines harder, look here. http://exopolitics.blogs.com/ebolagate/2015/02/questionable-anti-semitic-attacks-in-europe-and-an-odd-link-to-unicef.html.
The funny little video gives an idea of what different "ingredients" can do to us (in this case, endocrine disruptors). They all come from Pharma, or wearing its other hat, Big PHarm. Together they are contaminating the earth, the air, the water, and people's bodies with "ingredients" they can only sell by hiding or lying about them.
Children whose bodies are not yet contaminated (unvaccinated children) are now the main targets of Pharma (just as Big PHarm is doing all it can to contaminate fields that are still organic). Pharma needs to move fast because with each passing day, vaccination starts to look more and more like its pharmaceutical cousin, industrial agriculture - an outdated, ineffective and dangerous practice .
Having failed to get full public acceptance for vaccines and now actually losing ground despite lies, fear-mongering and threats, Pharma must get Congress to mandate vaccines.
If that happens, Pharma is ready with its "vaccine changing" rule to enjoy carte blanche, injecting anything it wants into anyone.
It is a complete game changer. That little rule - never voted on by Congress, just inserted by Pharma - turns already worrying vaccines into untested and UNKNOWN vaccines, just exactly like the Nazis once also mandated.
With that rule and if Congress removes the vaccine exemptions - that is, people's right to decide what can go into their bodies and their children's bodies - Pharma will be able to do anything.
This past spring, the FDA took a hands-off approach to Merck’s admission that DNA from a lethal pig virus is contaminating doses of RotaTeq vaccine being swallowed by millions of newborn babies.1 Now the agency responsible for making sure pharmaceutical products do not hurt people is proposing a Rule Change to give one staff employee the sole authority to allow “exceptions or alternatives” when drug companies want to change vaccine ingredients, such as preservatives (like thimerosal) or adjuvants (like aluminum) or the amount of residual protein and antibiotics in vaccines.
The FDA’s proposed change to Requirements for Constituent Materials was quietly published in The Federal Register on March 30 and the deadline for public comment is only days away - on Monday, June 28. 2
The FDA is arguing that the rule change is necessary to “reduce burdens on industry” and to provide “greater flexibility and reduced regulatory requirements.” It gives one FDA staff Director the power to give drug companies the green light to “employ advances in science and technology as they become available” when companies want to make new vaccines really fast and get more bang for the buck.
If the proposed Rule Change is put into effect, a vaccine manufacturer could request a change in the content or amount of vaccine ingredients by simply writing a “brief statement describing the basis for the request and supporting data” as part of the original license application or for a pending or approved application. There is no information about how much scientific evidence the drug companies will have to submit to prove the new ingredients are safe; or whether the FDA’s Vaccine Advisory Committee will be able to review that evidence; or whether the American public will have a chance to comment before vaccine ingredients are changed.
This does not look like the transparency, public participation and collaboration in government that President Obama said he supports. 3 It removes the checks and balances necessary for good government.
Last year when federal health officials declared a pandemic H1N1 “swine flu” national emergency, drug companies put a full court press on the FDA to fast track licensure of highly reactive oil based squalene adjuvants 4 and the use of new technology, like insect cells, 5 to make pandemic influenza vaccines. During meetings of the FDA’s Vaccine Advisory Committee, the National Vaccine Information Center opposed both the quick licensure of squalene adjuvants, 6 which hyperstimulate the immune system and have been associated with autoimmunity, 78910 and the use of insect cells, 11 which could be contaminated with insect viruses. 121314
Neither technology was licensed by the FDA last year 1516 but there are tens of thousands of doses of squalene that the federal government bought and is stored in warehouses waiting to be used. 17 If the proposed Rule Change goes into effect, will drug companies be able to put those doses of squalene in flu vaccines by getting only one FDA employee to say “yes?” This and other risks to health are waiting for the American people if drug companies can get quick approval from one person to raise the amount of mercury, 1819 aluminum 20212223 or residual protein in vaccines, 2425 which have been associated with chronic inflammation, brain and immune system damage. 26
This summer the American people are watching the horrifying consequences of inadequate federal regulation of the oil industry play out in the oil soaked Gulf coast. There are legitimate questions being asked about the cozy relationship and financial conflicts of interest between federal agency regulators and big oil companies partnering with the U.S. Government to generate billions of dollars for the U.S. Treasury. 27 Calls for an independent federal safety oversight agency to monitor offshore drilling are being made in congressional hearings.
NVIC has been calling for an independent vaccine safety oversight agency free from financial and ideological conflicts of interest 28 since Congress passed a law in 1997 allowing drug companies to pay the FDA to fast track licensure of new vaccines and drugs. 2930 During the last decade, that fast track system has seen scores of risky drugs like Vioxx and reactive vaccines like Gardasil quickly licensed, only to be followed by tragic reports of deaths and injuries. 3132
While federal health officials are spending millions of dollars of taxpayer money to persuade every American from infancy through the last year of life to take a flu shot every year, 33 and hundreds of new vaccines are now in clinical trials, 3435 it is no time for the FDA to make it easier for drug companies to put whatever they want in vaccines. Giving absolute power to one FDA employee, who reports to unelected political appointees, who could be subjected to heavy pressure from Big Pharma lobbyists, is not the way to regulate vaccines for safety. ....
It’s your health, Your family. Your choice. Help send a strong message to Washington that it is time for government to stop partnering with the pharmaceutical industry and RAISE the safety bar for drug companies enjoying congressionally mandated liability protection while making big profits from selling government mandated vaccines.
The recent attacks on in Europe being called anti-Semitic and blamed on Muslims are followed by an immediate and aggressive campaign to encourage Jews in France and Denmark to move to Israel for safety.
Those attacks and the push toward Israel are disturbingly similar to what happened to Sephardic Jews in Morocco, Tunisia, Algeria, Yemen and other countries soon after Israel was declared. There, "anti-Semitic" attacks were actually carried out by Jewish agents (the Mossad) to scare settled Jewish communities into leaving their homes of hundreds of years, places where they had good lives and where relationships with Muslims were by and large positive. Zionist Crimes Against the Jews http://www.thepeoplesvoice.org/TPV3/Voices.php/2013/11/11/zionist-crimes-against-the-jews
The article mentions the irradiation of North African Jews once they arrived in Israel. But it doesn't say this lethal attack on Jewish North African children was carried out by UNICEF, a UN Agency claiming to help children, which used 35,000 more rads than the limit of exposure. Children were screaming in pain, but UNICEF continued.
UNICEF's Role is Sterilizing and Killing Sephardic Children http://ladinopresiozo.wordpress.com/2013/09/07/unicefs-role-in-sterilizing-and-killing-sephardic-children/
UNICEF is relevant now, because it is currently killing children with vaccines. And at a time when the US government, deeply controlled by a powerful and corrupt pharmaceutical industry, is considering mandating vaccines for the entire country (removing the Nuremberg Code created originally to contain the Nazi pharmaceutical industry), and when we are being threatened by ebola (which the US and CDC hold the patent on) and by ebola vaccines which have criminal and even Nazi connections, it is useful to look further into UNICEF since it is directly involved not only in ebola outbreaks and in many more deaths of children, but is also involved in just those areas of the world where the US is attempting to take control (Syrian, Pakistan, ....).
Bill Gates is mentioned below because UNICEF works with his foundation and may be purchasing its vaccines from there.
Thus there are three parts to this article - first, present day attacks on Jews in Europe which parallel Mossad's attacks on Jews in North Africa, both followed by their being urged to move to Israel, and second, what UNICEF did to maim and kill North African Jewish children after they arrived in Israel, and third, what UNICEF is still doing to maim and kill children.
The question in all cases is: Who is going on, really, since things are not what they appear on the surface?
UNICEF was just involved a vaccine campaign in West Africa, where, coincidentally, ebola suddenly broke out where UNICEF had injected people. But more, ebola also broke out simultaneously in all the scattered locations where other vaccines campaigns were being carried out by the UN, the WHO, the Red Cross and Doctors without Borders. Such a scattered eruption of disease is not in any way how an actual epidemic occurs. A real epidemic starts in one place and starts to move out from there as more people are infected.
According to a PIL [public document] filed in the Supreme Court against the use of the vaccine, the Pentavelent vaccine has been banned or was not being used in European countries, Japan, the UK, Canada, and the US.
Pakistan, Vietnam, Bhutan, and Sri Lanka have stopped using the vaccine after reports of serious allergic reactions and even deaths
The charge made by community health activists against BMGF and GAVI (which has members from pharma companies on its board) is that they are working with WHO and UNICEFto promote vaccine use among the poorer countries .... Some commentators are referring to the incident as “fraud” perpetrated on third world where the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation and their “vaccine empire are under fire”.
While Syria has been reportedly polio free since 1999, the discovery of 10 new cases of polio inside Syria has prompted UNICEF to begin vaccinating over 20 million Syrian children under the age of five with the live oral polio vaccine. The aggressive campaign also targets Syrian children outside of Syria in neighboring countries where numerous refugee camps exist. ....
Unfortunately, what UNICEF reports and what gets republished in almost all mainstream media reports regarding the polio vaccine, fail to mention that this is the live oral polio vaccine, which actually sheds the virus, and that the vaccine is known to cause outbreaks of polio and paralysis. The fact that the oral polio vaccine contains “pathogenic vaccine-derived polioviruses” is very well documented in the scientific literature, but seldom, if ever, reported in the popular media. Children carrying around the live virus shed it, and it ends up in the sewage systems.
While Syria has been reportedly polio free since 1999, the discovery of 10 new cases of polio inside Syria has prompted UNICEF to begin vaccinating over 20 million Syrian children under the age of five with the live oral polio vaccine. The aggressive campaign also targets Syrian children outside of Syria in neighboring countries where numerous refugee camps exist.
As Al Jazeer is reporting, “We’re never going to know how exactly how it arrived in Syria.” Guesses are that it originated in Pakistan.
Unfortunately, what UNICEF reports and what gets republished in almost all mainstream media reports regarding the polio vaccine, fail to mention that this is the live oral polio vaccine, which actually sheds the virus, and that the vaccine is known to cause outbreaks of polio and paralysis. The fact that the oral polio vaccine contains “pathogenic vaccine-derived polioviruses” is very well documented in the scientific literature, but seldom, if ever, reported in the popular media. Children carrying around the live virus shed it, and it ends up in the sewage systems.
- See more at: http://healthimpactnews.com/2013/syrian-refugees-create-huge-new-market-for-out-dated-live-polio-vaccine-over-20-million-children-to-be-vaccinated/#sthash.hrFqhnb5.dpuf
While Syria has been reportedly polio free since 1999, the discovery of 10 new cases of polio inside Syria has prompted UNICEF to begin vaccinating over 20 million Syrian children under the age of five with the live oral polio vaccine. The aggressive campaign also targets Syrian children outside of Syria in neighboring countries where numerous refugee camps exist.
As Al Jazeer is reporting, “We’re never going to know how exactly how it arrived in Syria.” Guesses are that it originated in Pakistan.
Unfortunately, what UNICEF reports and what gets republished in almost all mainstream media reports regarding the polio vaccine, fail to mention that this is the live oral polio vaccine, which actually sheds the virus, and that the vaccine is known to cause outbreaks of polio and paralysis. The fact that the oral polio vaccine contains “pathogenic vaccine-derived polioviruses” is very well documented in the scientific literature, but seldom, if ever, reported in the popular media. Children carrying around the live virus shed it, and it ends up in the sewage systems.
- See more at: http://healthimpactnews.com/2013/syrian-refugees-create-huge-new-market-for-out-dated-live-polio-vaccine-over-20-million-children-to-be-vaccinated/#sthash.hrFqhnb5.dpuf
MB comment: UNICEF (United Nations Children's Fund) boasts of its partnership with the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation in their aptly-named Decade of Vaccines (DoV) Collaboration. Zimbabwe
“At the main hospital in Mbarara during that month of 1977 more than 600 children had died following (oral) polio vaccination. 600 children! So even some of the timid medical practitioners who were initially afraid to come out, started saying ‘Oh, we knew this oral polio vaccine was trouble because as soon as the child receives it, they get a temperature and their health goes downhill and there is nothing that you could do.’” – Kihura Nkuba (Nov. 2002) “UN Vaccination Program Backfires in Africa” USA Survival
(Save the Children is also involved with the Gates Foundation, and along with the CIA, is killing children with vaccines.)
Though UNICEF is killing children itself, it appears to be acting as a propaganda tool to support US military operations, by reporting its being appalled at deaths of children in strategic military locations.
Syria (where UNICEF is giving children polio with the oral polio vaccine, the same vaccine that killed 10,000 children in Pakistan)
BAGHDAD, 23 April 2012 - UNICEF condemns an attack that took place yesterday on a secondary school that killed two children and injured one near the northern Iraqi city of Tikrit.
New York (December 16, 2014) - "The horrific, callous killing of more than one hundred children today in UNICEF extends our heartfelt sympathy to the families of the children who have been lost.
The United Nations Children's Fund (UNICEF) has reacted to the last Boko Haram insurgents attack on Baga town which lead to the death of many while causing others to flee the town.
Most recently, UNICEF UK just put out a report on violence against children in the world. But once again, things are not what they seem.
UNICEF UK is pointing outside the UK to condemn other countries for violence against children. This is most strange timing since right now in the UK there is a massive exposure occurring of pedophile rings connected to the UK Parliament, to the UK Monarchy, to the UK Churches, and connected to the police and child protective services. These rings have committed rape, torture and murder of children, and even satanic rituals in which babies are murdered, their blood drunk and their flesh is eaten. The elite of the UK are involved
And in Scotland(part of the UK). https://dublinsmick.wordpress.com/tag/satanic-ritual-murder-in-scotland/
And in Ireland. http://childabuserecovery.com/decapitated-dismembered-children-in-catholic-mass-grave-site-were-ritually-murdered/
Oddly, UNICEF UK doesn't mention any of that violence against children though the news is full of it.
Nor does it mention secret UK government documents going back 30 years that were obtained through FOIA requests, which prove that the UK government and the pharmaceutical industry (the vaccine industry) have known that
The documents also detail the UK government and the vaccine companies colluding to hide that information from the public and to prevent safety studies of vaccines.
Obviously, then, both pedophilia by the UK elite and childhood vaccines manufactured by the wealthy UK pharmaceutical industry tied to that elite, present a constant, violent, massive and potentially lethal threat to all UK children. In the first case, there is profit in procuring children. In the second case, billions in profit depend on using children as involuntary "markets" for known to be worthless and disease-causing vaccines that can kill. And in both cases, the UK government is suppressing investigations and threatening and demonizing those attempting to inform the public.
There are essentially two "industries" that depend on violence against children - one underground, that supplies children to meet the perverted sexual and occult desires of the elite, and one above ground, cloaked as "health," that uses children as involuntary "customers" for its known-to-be disease-causing, toxic products.
(An aside - all the new vaccines contain GMOs and alter DNA, so children are being fundamentally altered at the level of their DNA by such injections, using exactly the method used by Monsanto to genetically seeds. This unreported fundamental change to a child's genetic code is benignly called DNA uptake. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DNA_vaccination)
UNICEF UK is doing nothing to protect the children in the UK from the endemic and massive violence against them - rape, torture, murder, satanic sacrifices, and endless injections with unlimited numbers of viruses and toxins.
UNICEF UK is not even reporting on any of it.
The violence in the UK against children is on an industrial scale.
Instead, UNICEF UK is pointing elsewhere. UNICEF UK is actually DISTRACTING from the extreme levels of violence against and even murders of children occurring in the UK.
What's more, UNICEF is deeply involved itself in killing children globally with vaccines.
It matters to ask: What is going on, really, since things are not as they appear on the surface?
Mennonite girls gather at the health and safety clinic in Ohio (AP/Tom E. Puskar)
