Radical Idea: Paper Suggests Forcing Your Children Into Vaccine Trials

Stealth viruses, like SV40, have contaminated vaccines in the past.

Would you like to know a definition of radically insane? How about you or your child being forced to participate in experimental vaccine trials?

Somehow right off the bat the idea of forced participation in experimental vaccine trials reminds me of the Tuskegee Syphilis Experiment the U.S. government undertook that was profoundly and morally wrong.

“For 40 years, the U.S. Public Health Service has conducted a study in which human guinea pigs, not given proper treatment, have died of syphilis and its side effects,” Associated Press reporter Jean Heller wrote on July 25, 1972. “The study was conducted to determine from autopsies what the disease does to the human body.”  http://www.npr.org/programs/morning/features/2002/jul/tuskegee/

According to a paper published by the American Medical Association’s Virtual Mentor, current enrollment in vaccine trials is extremely low. There is now talk of creating a federal law to force individuals to ‘opt-out’ of vaccine trials for the greater good of society. Read the paper here: http://virtualmentor.ama-assn.org/2012/01/pfor1-1201.html

Authors Susanne Sheehy and Joel Meyer float the idea of creating a system where a law forces an individual to make a “mandated choice” to participate in vaccine trials. This suggested policy not only is dangerously naïve but downright unconstitutional and ought to be regarded as such by every entity whether medical, legal, or taxpayer.

In reality, what is being proposed is complete medical tyranny.  Here’s why…

 

Mandatory Participation Creates a Customer List for Big Pharma

It sounds harmless. Hey, they even suggested we have a ‘mandated choice’, right? In order to see the bigger picture, we need to take this logic a few steps further.

For example, everyone would be required to enroll into a database. This is the case now even if you exempt your child from vaccines! Yes! You’re still in a database.  What about HIPAA violations and privacy rules?  Don’t they apply?

The ‘volunteer’ information would have to be shared with the Pharmaceutical Companies, which is the full intent, so as to gather trial and field test data Big Pharma can document before introducing a new product to FDA for approval. Of course, Pharma could call upon those who would want to volunteer.

What if they couldn’t get the numbers they needed – then what?

My prediction is they’d either force citizens to participate, or use a helpless population that could be gathered from any segment of society they designate.  The Willowbrook Institution ‘studies’ in New York is an example of ‘how they do things’.

Just in case you’re not familiar with the travesty at Willowbrook, Dr. Saul Krugman fed feces to children in order to test the effectiveness of the Hepatitis B vaccine they were researching to produce.  Read more about it here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Willowbrook_State_School

Truly, can it get any more sinister? I think it can.

Here’s even more proof.

 

Vaccine Manufacturers Are Protected From Lawsuits if Your Child is Harmed

Please remember this point: If your child is given a vaccine and harmed, vaccine manufacturers are not responsible financially or morally.

The National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act passed in 1986 shields vaccine manufacturers from any liability. If vaccines are 99.99% safe, as medical professionals tell us, having such a law doesn’t make much sense.

That law is a travesty of justice and should be rescinded by Congress who put it into place at the apparent behest of Big Pharma and its thousands of lobbyists with deep pockets informing members of Congress how to go about establishing Big Pharma’s corporate governance.

Nevertheless, the next logical question to answer would be, “What happens if your child is harmed?”

I speak from personal experience—my son is vaccine damaged—when I say there is little help waiting for you. Parents of vaccine-injured children are discovering the next-to-impossible task of being compensated by the government vaccine court.

Parents also ought to be aware pharmaceutical companies treat children with callous disregard, especially in vaccine trials. A recent article written by Christina England spells out how pharmaceutical researchers skew adverse reactions to vaccines to make it look like the vaccine is safe, when it is not. Read how premature babies had vaccines tested on them here: http://vactruth.com/2012/01/23/babies-used-as-lab-rats/

But what if vaccine injuries take other forms, like causing cancer?

We should also be mindful of the long-term effects, too, especially recombinant DNA.

Even if viruses causing cancer, among other things, subsequently are discovered in the vaccine—as was the case with the polio vaccine of the 1950s and ‘60s—past experience shows government will keep the vaccines on the shelves. They don’t want to risk eroding confidence in any aspect of the vaccine program.

Their job is to protect Big Pharma’s apparent policy over the health of your child. If you think you or your child will be compensated, expect years of dealing with government bureaucracy and probable rejection, as thousands of families experience to date.

 

Summary

Parents are told pharmaceutical companies exist for the ‘Greater Good’ of society. Yet, a quick check on the Department of Justice website shows that major Pharma corporations have been convicted of serious criminal offenses with only ‘slaps on the wrists’—monetary fines, unless there have been class action law suits filed in which harmed individuals sometimes receive compensation for pain and suffering.

Give me a break!

Any time a law has to be created mandating participation, you can bet there’s BIG money involved! As I mentioned above, such a law would give Big Pharma a guaranteed customer list plus immunity from injuring the ‘volunteers’. Can pharmaceutical companies get a much sweeter deal? I don’t think so; how about you?

The suggestion of mandating participation in medical trials has no place in a free society. It ought to go where it rightly belongs – in the trash along with their vaccines.

 

References:

  1. Should Participation in Vaccine Clinical Trials be Mandated? http://virtualmentor.ama-assn.org/2012/01/pdf/pfor1-1201.pdf
  2. http://www.npr.org/programs/morning/features/2002/jul/tuskegee/
  3. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Childhood_Vaccine_Injury_Act
  4. http://vactruth.com/2012/01/23/babies-used-as-lab-rats/
  5. http://vactruth.com/2011/12/30/3-filthy-truths-about-vaccines-cancer/

 

Photo Credit: Kanijoman

  • Chistina128

    Excellent article Jeff.

    What they are planning to use is ‘passive consent’. Basically if you do not sign the form to opt out you consent.

    This has been used in the USA for years to screen children for mental illness at school in a programe called Teen Screen please see http://www.proliberty.com/observer/20060631.htm If you do not know what Teen Screen is read http://www.profitableharm.com/teenscreen.html .

    People really need to know and understand the implications.

    Thank you for the reference to my article.

    Christina

  • AussieMum

    Whatever happened to “opt-in” as opposed to “opt-out?”

  • http://twitter.com/VaccineRisks Vaccine Risks

    An excellent, eye opening article. Spreading widely including to pro-vax sites, parent magazines, Twitter, etc. It is imperative that everybody be made aware of this situation.

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100000255186025 Corin Donne

    The Vaccine Information Network (VINE) posted this article via their facebook page and I have responded to them… critically. They suggested I comment here. This is what I posted on the VINE page so please understand the wording is aimed at them and references to “the article you posted” are to the article above. My original post was responded to by Erwin Alber, the creator of VINE and his response is aswell as the original article can be found here: http://goo.gl/Hhv7u 

    I fail to see how the sensationalist headline of “paper suggests forcing your children into vaccine trials” can possibly be justified when the paper in question [http://goo.gl/DsjBc] does not even include the word ‘children’.
    The paper merely muses the concept of “mandated choice” which seems perfectly reasonable possibility when you consider the sentence: “In this case individuals would be required by law to state in advance their willingness to participate in vaccine trials.” Crucial word: “their willingness” – if they were not willing they would not participate.The article on the website to which you have linked [http://goo.gl/PbLFf] ignores the paper around which it is based and makes up, for want of a better phrase “a load of scary bullshit”. For example: “everyone would be required to enroll into a database.” Well for a start, this is just a groundless assertion with no justification or support given from within the paper (or at all) and that assertion is the premise on which that whole section of the article is based on.Furthermore, “The ‘volunteer’ information would have to be shared with the Pharmaceutical Companies” another unsupported claim, the body which would have to be set up to run the “mandated choice” scheme could be completely autonomous and only forward data to the companies running trials of relevance such as age/medical history/sex (and other details which effect the response of an individual to vaccination) of the people who have no opted-out of the scheme. Then most likely some computer software would pick a list of people from this data in such a way as to minimise bias towards any particular group- the organisations running the trails would only be given IMPERSONAL information of people who had NOT OPTED-OUT. Then the people chosen would be contacted by the quasi-autonomous government body set up to run the scheme and informed of their selection.The above paragraph is merely to show that the evil-nasty-scary system invented by the conspiracy theorists at the website you linked to is not remotely close to anything that anyone would consider implementing.Now, the section about pharmaceutical companies not being liable for harm caused- (I know nothing of United States law), presumably the organisations running the trial would not be liable as you would have “[stated] in advance your willingness to participate” and you would have done so in full knowledge of the suspected and potential risks.The unexplained, throwaway phrase “especially recombinant DNA” appears to be another scary word inserted into the article to terrify parents into making ill-informed choices about the health of their children.My ‘favourite’ statement from the article is:”My prediction is they’d either force citizens to participate, or use a helpless population that could be gathered from any segment of society they designate.”That sentence begins with “My prediction” but it might as well be “my-random nasty-sounding-worst-possible-scenario-conspiracy-theory-put-in-a-serious-context-so-that-it-sounds-vaguely-plausible is”.

    Looking forward to your response.

    Corin Donne

  • http://vactruth.com Jeffry John Aufderheide

    I’ll be brief my response.

    Your question, or rather long-winded critique, lacks historical perspective or any basic situational awareness. Yes, look up recombinant DNA contamination. Look up human diploid cells… and above all look up SV40.

    Vaccine trials are performed on children all of the time. For example, Novartis performed a trial for the H1N1 vaccine in Denver in 2009/2010 and were injecting children with containing excipients such as thimerosal and nonoxynol-9, a spermicide. To believe vaccine trials wouldn’t be performed on children because, “it wasn’t explicitly talked about in the paper,” is naive at best.

    Second, since you indicated you are not from the United States, perhaps you ought to know in most states here, whether a child is ‘opted out’ of vaccines or not, they are entered in a database. Feel free to investigate it at your leisure.

    http://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/programs/iis/contacts-state-iis.htm#state

    The infrastructure is already in place. Therefore, having a name entered in a database is probable. If there is a law mandating ‘choice’, do you seriously think they’ll keep handwritten records in a notebook somewhere?

    Lastly, if you believe CRIMINAL pharmaceutical companies dare not influence politicians or get access to this information, you haven’t been paying attention. And by the way, I’m not speaking platitudes when I say ‘CRIMINAL pharmaceutical companies’. Anyone can go to the Department of Justice website http://www.justice.gov/ and type in the name of any pharmaceutical company – especially ones that manufacture vaccines.

    Influence of the Pharmaceutical Industry, House of Commons Health Committee March 2005
    http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200405/cmselect/cmhealth/42/42.pdf

    Access to health information, especially when big money is involved, can change by a ‘stroke of the pen’.

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100000255186025 Corin Donne

    Thank you for your rapid response, I will look into the things you mentioned. I doubt I will have anymore input in the vaccine debate seeing as the VINE page appears to have banned me despite my relative politeness, it would appear they do not want a forum for public debate but rather an outlet for their bile. You know the people promoting your article support – HOMEOPATHY, which is like- believing in magic but less fun. 

    Edit- When I said about the article not mentioning children I didn’t mean that vaccine trials have never been carried out on children, just that the paper does not say if children would be included and if their parents would be allowed to decide for them.

    Of course I believe pharmaceutical companies can have a huge influence on politics through lobbying, so can any other group with serious funding- welcome to (under regulated) capitalist democracy.

  • http://vactruth.com Jeffry John Aufderheide

    You’re welcome to post comments on articles, just keep it clean.

  • CATT

    Sounds like Dr Mengele all over again.

  • CATT

    Mandated choice? That does not sound like choice to me, but more like forced issue or as in mandated meaning there is no room for choice. Is this an oximoron?

  • Lydia Jones

    Amen.

  • Jtwinboys

    It HAS happened.  Read Dr Mary’s Monkey.  AND we are being put into databases right now.  Last time my children were to the dr it took a long time with visit as they were just starting with the computers.  ALL information was entered into the computer database.  Then next time they visit, they can just pull up their screen by typing in their name.  With nationalized health care, the government is now privy to your private health information including whether you opt-in or opt-out.

  • Jtwinboys

    Corrin, homeopathy does work.  Next time your child or grandchild has an earache, purchase a homeopathic earache remedy at your local drug store.  Most carry a few now.  Don’t just assume they don’t work because it sounds like mumbo-jumbo to you.  I think you will be pleasantly surprised when they earache clears up in a day after MAYBE 2 uses and doesn’t return.  No need for a trip to the doctor, nor an antibiotic which kills bad AND good bacteria.  AND repeated use of antibiotics for too many needless cases has led to resistant strains.  Maybe you can even find the very few (maybe 1 study) that was even conducted to show they DO work.  I think you could find it on the internet.  Thank you for your input.  Good health to you and yours.