VacTruth.com http://vactruth.com Your Child. Your Choice. Mon, 07 Jul 2014 21:27:51 +0000 en-US hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.9.1 Should Premature Babies Be Included In The One-Size-Fits-All Vaccination Policy? http://vactruth.com/2014/06/17/one-size-fits-all-vaccination/ http://vactruth.com/2014/06/17/one-size-fits-all-vaccination/#comments Tue, 17 Jun 2014 04:57:15 +0000 http://vactruth.com/?p=16281 According to a fact sheet published by the University of Auckland, premature babies weighing as little as seventeen ounces are supposed to be vaccinated with same dose of vaccines given to an adult. The vaccination schedule is not being adjusted in any way and does not take into consideration a premature baby’s fragility or their weight.

Their decision has left many professionals questioning whether or not the “one-size-fits-all” vaccination policy is really suitable for premature babies, given the fact that many of them are not yet medically stable.

The University of Auckland believes that no changes are needed and recommends that the vaccination schedule should not be adjusted. They insist that these fragile babies should be vaccinated according to their chronological age, rather than their due date, and that they should be vaccinated in line with the vaccination schedule set by the government.

Is The One-Size-Fits-All Policy Right For Premature Babies?

In the USA, approximately 500,000 babies are born prematurely each year. These are babies born before 37 weeks of completed pregnancy. According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), the earlier a baby is born, the more likely they are to suffer from severe health problems. Many of these babies die, while others may be severely disabled with learning disabilities, cerebral palsy, respiratory disorders, visual complications, hearing loss and feeding and digestive problems.

The CDC states:

“Although most babies born just a few weeks early do well and have no health issues, some do have more health problems than full term babies. For example, a baby born at 35 weeks is more likely to have—

  • jaundice
  • breathing problems
  • longer hospital stay” [1]

Many of these babies spend weeks, if not months, in incubators, while their lives hang in the balance. Is it really appropriate to vaccinate such fragile babies, regardless of their state of health?

No Changes Are Recommended for Preterm Babies!

Governments around the world are demanding a one-size-fits-all vaccination policy. The University of Auckland’s Fact Sheet for Health Professionals, titled Immunization for the Low Birth Weight and/or Preterm Infant, makes this policy very clear, stating that:

“Premature and low birth weight infants are at greater risk of increased mortality and morbidity from vaccine preventable disease.”

The university recommends that:

 “Immunizations should be given according to the National Immunization Schedule at the appropriate chronological age. Do not adjust age for preterm birth, i.e. National Immunization Schedule vaccines start at six weeks of age from the date of birth. The usual vaccine dosage should be used.” (emphasis added)

The university is so keen that these tiny babies are vaccinated on time that they state very clearly in their fact sheet that “vaccinations should not be withheld or delayed.” This policy applies even if the infant has suffered from episodes of apnea, a condition causing the baby to forget to breathe for short periods of time.

For infants born to hepatitis B carrier mothers, the university states:

“Give hepatitis B immunoglobulin (HBIG) and a hepatitis B immunization (HBvaxPRO®) within 12 hours of birth regardless of birth weight.” (emphasis added)

Once again, this clearly indicates that the one-size-fits-all policy is being used regardless of the baby’s health.

The fact sheet continues:

“Infants of non-hepatitis B carrier mothers:

Three doses of hepatitis B containing vaccine beginning at six weeks of age, regardless of birth weight, are expected to provide protection.

• Administer DTaP-IPV-HepB/Hib (Infanrix®-hexa) vaccine.” (emphasis added) [2]

The fact sheet is sickening, especially when you consider that many of these babies are so small they can measure little more than 12.5 inches in length and suffer from life-threatening conditions requiring feeding tubes, heart monitors, oxygen therapy, infrared lamps and photo therapy to keep them alive.

Many Professionals Disagree With The One-Size-Fits-All Policy

Many professionals disagree with the one-size-fits-all policy.

One such professional is scientist Lucija Tomljenovic, PhD. In her letter to the editor of the journal Vaccine, titled One Size Fits All, written in 2012, she stated that:

“There is a general medical consensus that vaccines have revolutionized human health by significantly reducing morbidity and mortality due to infectious diseases, particularly those affecting children.”

She continued:

“Indeed, as Poland et al. note, ‘Vaccines are the only medical intervention that we attempt to deliver to every living human on earth.’ As with any medication, vaccines also carry risks of adverse reactions (ADRs). Although the temporal association between vaccinations and serious ADRs is clear, causality is rarely established.”

She followed this by adding:

“Nonetheless, Poland et al. rightly ask whether ‘with the advances coming from the new biology of the 21st Century,’ it is time to consider ‘how might new genetic and molecular biology information inform vaccinology practices of the future?’ In light of this question Poland et al. conclude that ‘one-size-fits-all’ approach for all vaccines and all persons should be abandoned. This legitimate conclusion should equally apply to vaccine efficacy, as well as safety. Regarding the latter, the widely held view that serious vaccine-related ADRs are rare may need revision, as current worldwide vaccination policies indeed operate on ‘one-size fits all’ assumption. This assumption persists despite the fact that historically, vaccine trials have routinely excluded vulnerable individuals with a variety of pre-existing conditions (e.g. premature birth, personal or family history of developmental delay or neurologic disorders including epilepsy/seizures, hypersensitivity to vaccine constituents, etc.” (emphasis added) [3]

If Dr. Tomljenovic is correct that premature babies have been excluded from vaccination trials due to their vulnerability, this would suggest that there is no data supporting that vaccinations can be safely administered to these infants.

Why do our governments not see this as an issue?

Vaccine Inserts Tell A Different Story

Reading through the various vaccination inserts, you will see that many state that the decision to vaccinate a preterm infant should be based upon the child’s medical status.

For example, the insert for the Merck’s hepatitis B vaccine states:

“Apnea following intramuscular vaccination has been observed in some infants born prematurely. Decisions about when to administer an intramuscular vaccine, including RECOMBIVAX HB, to infants born prematurely should be based on consideration of the individual infant’s medical status and the potential benefits and possible risks of vaccination.” (emphasis added) [4]

The insert for Sanofi Pasteur’s DTaP vaccine, Daptacel, states:

“Apnea following intramuscular vaccination has been observed in some infants born prematurely. The decision about when to administer an intramuscular vaccine, including DAPTACEL, to an infant born prematurely should be based on consideration of the individual infant’s medical status and the potential benefits and possible risks of vaccination.” (emphasis added) [5]

And the insert for GlaxoSmithKline’s (GSK) Infanrix (DtaP-IPV-HepB/Hib) hexa-vaccine states:

“Limited data in 169 premature infants indicate that INFANRIX hexa® can be given to premature children. However, a lower immune response may be observed and the level of clinical protection remains unknown. The potential risk of apnea and the need for respiratory monitoring for 48 -72h should be considered when administering the primary immunization series to very premature infants (born ≤ 28 weeks of gestation) and particularly for those with a previous history of respiratory immaturity.” (emphasis added)

Despite their warnings and the fact that they have limited data, GSK continues by stating:

“As the benefit of vaccination is high in this group of infants, vaccination should not be withheld or delayed.” (emphasis added) [6]

Vaccinations Have Been Proven to Cause Stress-Induced Breathing Patterns In Children

Vaccinations have been proven beyond all doubt to lead to stress-induced breathing patterns in babies.

In 1985-1986, Cotwatch, a pioneering true breathing monitor was developed by Dr. Viera Scheibner and her late husband, Leif Karlsson, a Swedish electronics engineer specializing in patient monitoring systems. In a more detailed rewrite of her original paper published in 2004 by the Journal of the Australasian College of Nutritional & Environmental Medicine, she wrote:

Cotwatch was a true breathing monitor, meaning its electronics separated heartbeat and breathing and only breathing delayed the alarm. The feedback on breathing from the standard home monitor were alarms, while the microprocessor-based unit provided computer printouts of the record of breathing in the form of histograms stacked-up at an angle or vertical bars) the length of which directly reflected the stress level as integrals of the weighted apnoea-hypopnoea density (WAHD).” [7]

 

Dr. Scheibner says that this important feature means the difference between life and death and that, in a stress response in a baby, breathing stops first, while the heart is still beating. She explains that you must be alerted by an alarm before the heart stops in order to resuscitate the baby.

When Scheibner and Karlsson studied the histograms (printed data) of infants, they noticed that whenever the babies had received a vaccination, the charts showed clusters of stress-induced breathing patterns, proving conclusively that the vaccines that were causing the breathing problems.

In 1991, Dr. Viera Scheibner was invited to present the results of the data collection on babies’ breathing with the Cotwatch breathing monitor to the Second National Immunization Conference.

This information has been freely available ever since.

However, despite this information being freely available and many manufacturers stating that caution is needed when vaccinating premature babies, governments continue to insist that no changes to vaccination schedules are needed!

Dr. Viera Scheibner Has Strong Views on the Safety and Efficacy of Vaccinations

Dr. Scheibner believes that vaccinations are not only unsafe but also totally ineffective at preventing disease, not only for premature babies, but for everyone, and she has made her feelings abundantly clear in a five-page letter to Miss Pinkerton, a contact whose name appeared on an informational flyer received in regards to a Hearing on Safety of Hepatitis B Vaccine, held on May 18, 1999, titled Hearings on Hepatitis B Vaccine.

She wrote:

“When they were testing the acellular whooping cough vaccine in Sweden, as soon as the test babies were given 3 doses of the trial vaccine (meaning they were fully vaccinated) they had a huge epidemic of whooping cough in the fully vaccinated. They discontinued the trial before the targeted time of 2 years. I also need to add that practically all Swedish children below the age of 1 year participated in the trial. They expected 20 deaths and observed 45 (plus one accidental death) and yet this very significant increase was glossed over by saying that all deaths were judged unrelated to vaccination, even though there were deaths there within 24 hours or a few days.”

She finished her strong letter, which was full of research, facts and figures, by stating:

“I think that I outlined to you some of the essential facts about vaccination. Mandatory vaccination in the USA is indeed an arrogant insult to the American Constitution, freedom of choice and to just plain human decency and represents medical tyranny. It must be discontinued if the U.S. wants to continue claiming to be the guarantor of freedom for all and from all forms of tyranny. Charity starts at home.” [8]

After reading through her letter, I asked her in an email what her views were on vaccinating premature babies. She replied:

“Vaccinating premature babies under this false notion of ‘care’ and believing that they must be protected against infectious diseases because they are premature is totally misplaced, or at least the lack of common sense. I am at a loss to understand why they do it.”

Conclusion

Clearly, the one-size-fits-all vaccination policy does not fit premature babies. How can it be considered lawful or indeed moral to vaccinate premature babies with the same vaccinations that are administered to adults?

We can see from the studies undertaken by Dr. Viera Scheibner and her late husband Leif Karlsson that many of the routine vaccinations used on premature babies today can cause them to suffer stress-induced breathing patterns. These studies are irrefutable and have been used worldwide to demonstrate the link between vaccinations and breathing difficulties in young babies.

Despite this information, vulnerable, fragile babies are being vaccinated with multiple vaccinations on a daily basis, regardless of the danger.

Why does the medical profession dictate that animals receive vaccinations calculated according to their weight, but the one-size-fits-all policy is recommended for our children?

Surely, it is time to change this policy, once and for all.

This article is dedicated to a very special little girl, Aurora~Phi, whose name means “to show beauty in truth.” Aurora~Phi was born prematurely seven weeks ago. She was born to parents who do not believe in vaccination. Aurora~Phi is vaccine-free and said to be doing exceptionally well. She no longer needs her incubator and has been moved to the nursery.


 

Photo:  baby Aurora Phi soon after birth

]]>
http://vactruth.com/2014/06/17/one-size-fits-all-vaccination/feed/ 109
This ‘Misdirection Tactic’ is Used by Mainstream Media When Reporting Outbreaks http://vactruth.com/2014/05/18/doctors-misdirect-vaccine-concerns/ http://vactruth.com/2014/05/18/doctors-misdirect-vaccine-concerns/#comments Sun, 18 May 2014 15:03:42 +0000 http://vactruth.com/?p=16264 Many of the published mainstream media news reports outlining the recent outbreaks of measles and mumps in the US have blamed unvaccinated children for the problem.

All of the reports have strong, accusatory titles, with reporters repeatedly emphasizing the need for vaccination. They stress how parents who do not vaccinate their children are putting thousands of children at risk from potentially deadly diseases.

However, if you examine what is being written more closely, what they are actually saying is something entirely different. Hidden somewhere in the report will be a sentence with crucial information that many parents may miss. This information is hidden so well by the reporter that by the time most readers get to it, they will have been completely brainwashed by the rest of the information and are therefore unlikely to notice its significance.

This tactic is known as misdirection. [1]

Misdirection At Its Best

One particular news report that caught my eye refers to the recent outbreak of mumps in the state of Illinois. The website 5KSDK.com released a news bulletin titled Mumps Outbreak Caused by Vaccination Backlash. During the bulletin, a mother with fully vaccinated children is seen on film stating:

“All of my children have been vaccinated as scheduled their whole lives. I am a little disturbed that – eh – you know, if there is mumps here then that means that somebody’s children aren’t vaccinated.”

The news clip stated that:

“Health officials say a recent backlash against vaccines is helping aid the resurgence of the disease.”

The reporter continued by stating that nine of the reported mumps cases were students from the University of Illinois, Champaign.

Interestingly, the reporter then ended the report by stating that:

“All of those students have been vaccinated, but the vaccine is only 80 to 85 percent effective.” [2] (emphasis added)

This one sentence makes the whole report nonsensical, especially when you consider that both the mother used in the film and the report clearly blamed the unvaccinated population for the problem.

Yet More Misdirection

It appears that mainstream media are not only blaming the unvaccinated community for the current mumps “epidemic,” but also for the cases of measles that are being reported.

Or are they?

One article covering the measles outbreak in New York City reported that it is “the loons who refuse to vaccinate their children who put everyone at risk.” To make matters even worse, the article, which was published by The Daily Beast, titled Thanks, Anti-Vaxxers. You Just Brought Measles Back in NYC, was written by a doctor.

Let’s examine his article in more detail.

About halfway through his poorly written article, he stated:

“But now, shoppers in Boston-area supermarkets get to worry that they may have been exposed when they stopped by for groceries. Commuters in the Bay Area now have to contend with the possibility that they or their children may contract the illness because they happened to get on the wrong train. Over a dozen people around Los Angeles have been diagnosed with measles already this year, nearly half of them intentionally unvaccinated. (emphasis added)

Now, if nearly half of the cases of measles were intentionally unvaccinated, then this would mean that over half of them were intentionally vaccinated!

He continued his report by stating:

“The explanation is simple, and is as accessible as the nightly news. Vaccine-deniers are responsible to the resurgence of once-eliminated illnesses. Their movement is responsible for sickening people. They are to blame for the word ‘outbreak’ appearing in headlines from coast to coast.”

He followed his accusation by adding:

“The anti-vaccine crowd may think they’re only making a decision for their own family. In fact, they’re threatening to make the rest of us sick. Refusing to vaccinate your children means you are contributing to a worsening public health crisis. There is no denying it, and there is no point in sugar-coating it.” [3]

I wonder, however, if by the time readers had read the remainder of his waffle, just how many of them actually noticed that one sentence hidden at the end of a paragraph which changed the whole meaning of his article.

Let’s face it: if his article had been correct, this would mean that all parents choosing not to vaccinate their children would be putting the whole population at risk, including vaccinated children!

How could that be true if vaccinations protect children against disease?

Are Parents Being Fooled Into Believing Vaccinations Protect Children?

Parents have been fooled for many years into believing that by having their children vaccinated, it will protect them against deadly disease.

In fact, the CDC recommends vaccination, by stating the following information on their website:

“There’s no greater joy than helping your baby grow up healthy and happy. That’s why most parents choose immunization. Giving your baby the recommended immunizations by age two is the best way to protect him from 14 serious diseases, like measles and whooping cough.” [4]

However, this appears not to be the case, because yet another news report which I have chosen for us to examine says the complete and utter opposite. A report published by Wyoming News Source titled Anti-Vaccine Movement Puts Children at Risk stated that parents who refuse to vaccinate are irresponsible and are putting other children’s lives at risk. They stated:

“It’s important to note that the vast majority of children in Wyoming are properly vaccinated before they start school, and we commend their families for that. But just one unvaccinated child puts others at risk, whether that’s in the classroom or the emergency room. Some doctors won’t even treat unvaccinated children. The waiting room situation is just too fraught with risk. Parents who wisely vaccinate might think twice about taking their children to a place where they’d be at increased risk.” [5] (emphasis added)

Do they know something that we do not?

The Mayo Clinic Admits That Vaccines Do Not Work

It is entirely possible that they do. I say this because just a few days ago, a report was published by the Financial Post titled Vaccines Cannot Prevent Measles Outbreaks. Its author, Lawrence Solomon, reported on a paper written by Professor of Medicine and founder and leader of the Mayo Clinic’s Vaccine Research Group, Professor Gregory A. Poland, titled The Re-emergence of Measles in Developed Countries, which was published two years ago.

Describing the paper in huge detail, Solomon explained how Professor Poland had stressed that the reason the measles vaccine was not working was hidden in our genes. Solomon stated:

“ … Because different people have different genetic makeups, the vaccine is simply a dud in many, failing to provide the protection they think they’ve acquired.” [6]

According to Solomon, Professor Poland had reported that the re-emergence of measles was due to a failure to vaccinate as well as the failure of the measles vaccine.

Curious to know exactly what Professor Poland had written, I decided to research the report for myself. In the pre-edited version of the report, sure enough, Professor Poland had indicated that he believed that the re-emergence of measles was due to a failure to vaccinate, as well as the failure of the measles vaccine itself. However, he had also written the following very interesting couple of sentences:

“ … As illustrated in the Table, since 2005 these outbreaks have also occurred in the U.S. – with surprising numbers of cases occurring in persons who previously received one or even two documented doses of measles-containing vaccine. In fact, as of September 2011, the U.S. has had 15 measles outbreaks with 211 confirmed cases – the highest number of cases since 1996.”

Professor Poland acknowledged the fact that:

“Thus, while an excellent vaccine, a dilemma remains. As previously mentioned, measles is extraordinarily transmissible. At the same time, measles vaccine has a failure rate measured in a variety of studies at 2 –10%, and modeling studies suggest that herd immunity to measles requires approximately 95% or better of the population to be immune.” [7]

He indicated, however, that this may not be possible, because the vaccination cannot be administered to the immuno-compromised, pregnant woman and anyone who may be allergic to certain components of the vaccine.

For these reasons, he recommended that a new vaccination should be developed, stating that the following measures should take place:

“The practical answer to the dilemma of measles re-emergence is the development of better, next-generation vaccines. Given recent public opinion and large numbers of parents rejecting the current vaccine, combined with practical and immunologic limitations, new vaccines appear to be necessary. The ideal vaccine would require only one dose to be given at or soon after birth; it would lack contraindications and permit administration without highly trained health care personnel; it would be inexpensive, and heat stable. (emphasis added)

(To read this report in full, refer to reference six at the end of this article, or, to purchase the final edited version of the paper, follow the link provided in this version.)

So, who is telling the truth and whom do we believe?

Conclusion

It is difficult for parents to know who is right and who is wrong when it comes to vaccination. It is even more difficult to know whom to trust.

As parents, it appears that we are ‘damned if we do and damned if we don’t.’

When Professor Poland stated that the new vaccination “would lack contraindications and permit administration without highly trained health care personnel; it would be inexpensive, and heat stable,” could he inadvertently have been saying that the current MMR vaccination does have contraindications, is not always being administered by highly trained health care personnel and is not heat stable?

The answer would depend on how you interpret what he has written.

However, if that is indeed what he meant to say, this would have huge implications for hundreds of thousands of parents who believe that the MMR vaccination was responsible for their children’s disabilities. It also has implications for the many parents whose children have died after receiving this vaccination.

Whatever the real truth is, these articles, reports and papers have certainly given us something to think about, haven’t they?

Photo Credit

]]>
http://vactruth.com/2014/05/18/doctors-misdirect-vaccine-concerns/feed/ 106
The Scary Truth About the New York City Flu Vaccine Mandate http://vactruth.com/2014/04/21/nyc-flu-vaccine-mandate/ http://vactruth.com/2014/04/21/nyc-flu-vaccine-mandate/#comments Mon, 21 Apr 2014 12:26:12 +0000 http://vactruth.com/?p=16187 This year, 150,000 children will be added to the list of victims of forced vaccination. The leaders of New York City have mandated that all children under the age of six years old who attend day care or preschool must be vaccinated with the flu vaccine.

The official requirement mandates that all children between the ages of six months and five years who will be attending day care or preschool in New York City must be vaccinated between July 1 and December 31 of any given year. One health official claims that the rule won’t officially be enforced until the end of 2014, and a press release from the New York City Board of Health states that they will begin issuing violations on January 1, 2016. [1] [2]

New York City already mandates that children must be vaccinated against measles, mumps, rubella, pertussis, chicken pox, and tetanus. The new mandate is expected to affect 150,000 children under the age of six. Daycare and preschool facilities will be required to enforce the mandates or face they will face fines. [3]

Reason #1: It Interferes with Parental Choice

Regardless of people’s views about the safety and efficacy of vaccines, many people would agree that it should be an individual’s right to choose – or, in the case of a minor, a parent’s right to choose – which substances are injected into their body.

Well-known groups comprising large numbers of employees in New York are already opposed to vaccine mandates, including the New York State Public Employees Federation and the New York State Chapter of the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU). [4]

In its own statement regarding vaccination, even the American Medical Association (AMA) grants approval for medical personnel to receive exemptions for vaccines  due to a “recognized medical, religious, or philosophic reason,” exemptions which are more lenient than those granted to babies and preschool children affected by the NYC mandate.

Also in question is whether or not the city government has the authority to mandate vaccines. City officials claim that their Health Department has “authority over all matters concerning health in New York City” through the City Charter.

Recently, many Americans were outraged by the decision of officials from United Arab Emirates to mandate forced breastfeeding for the first two years of a child’s life. We knew that forcing someone to breastfeed, regardless of the benefits of breastfeeding, infringed on their personal right to make choices about their own bodies. Yet, some people fail to recognize that vaccination, the injection of foreign substances into one’s body, should also be a choice. [5]

Reason #2: The Flu Vaccine is Ineffective

The most recent statistics, based on scientific studies published by well-known media channels such as USA Today and The Huffington Post, demonstrate the flu vaccine’s inability to prevent the flu. Contrary to what vaccine manufacturers want us to believe, the flu vaccine will not make us healthier.

An article published on the website for USA Today stated, “This season’s flu vaccine was almost completely ineffective in people 65 and older.” One source from Vanderbilt University’s School of Medicine stated, “Everyone at CDC’s Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices meeting was scratching their heads over this.” [6] A similar article published by The Huffington Post reported an overall effectiveness rate of only 59 percent. [7]

Older adults are not the only group of people who experience few benefits from the flu vaccine. The CDC itself, when answering the question “How effective is the flu vaccine in children?” on its website, admits that “reduced benefits of flu vaccine are often found in studies of young children,” especially those under two years of age, the very age group targeted by this vaccine mandate. [8]

Influenza and similar illnesses can be caused by over 200 to 300 viruses, and some research indicates that vaccines may be most effective against combating influenza A and B, which comprise a mere ten percent of circulating viruses. Often, people mistake flu-like symptoms for influenza, and they don’t actually have the flu.

Furthermore, if you win the “flu lottery,” by actually contracting one of the three strains of flu that happens to be in this season’s flu vaccine, the vaccine will be worthless if your body hasn’t fully responded to the vaccine (which takes two weeks) or if too much time (more than three months) has passed between vaccination and viral exposure. [9] [10]

Reason #3: The Flu Vaccine is Dangerous

According to the CDC, the flu vaccine contains thimerosal, aluminum, antibiotics, egg protein, aborted human fetal cells, and monosodium glutamate (MSG). Our immune systems may be unable to combat these foreign, toxic substances, especially while under the influence of very common conditions such as high sugar intake, low vitamin D3 levels, and damaged gut lining.

According to a search of the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) website, in the past five years,  (during the period from January 2009 until February 2014) there were 55, 578 adverse events reported to VAERS related to the flu vaccine. Of these adverse events, 7,904 affected children under the age of six. [11]

Most disturbing among these numbers are the reported 47 children age five and under who died after receiving the flu vaccine during the past five years alone.

Keep in mind, vaccine injuries and deaths are grossly under-reported. Less than ten percent of vaccine injuries are actually reported, which brings the likely death toll from the flu vaccine to over one hundred children per year. [12]

Are There Exemptions for This Mandate?

Yes, although options for parents who don’t wish to vaccinate their children are limited. New York State allows medical and religious exemptions, although philosophical exemptions against vaccines are not granted. Fortunately, children who attend family day cares in people’s homes are currently exempt from the flu vaccine mandate. [13]

Conclusion

Families should not be forced to inject their child with toxic substances. They should not be forced to receive a vaccine that is ineffective and dangerous. They should not be forced to give up their preferred choice for quality, early childhood education and care programs in order to avoid forced vaccination. Families should be allowed to make the choices for their health and well-being that are best for their family.

If your child attends day care or preschool in New York City, we urge you to contact your elected officials and tell them you are against forced vaccination for your child. In addition, you may exercise your right to choose a religious exemption from the flu vaccine mandate, or enroll your child in a family day care, where they will be exempt from mandatory vaccination against the flu.

Finally, whether or not your child is affected by the latest NYC vaccine mandate, we urge you to learn about vaccine legislation where you live and research vaccine ingredients. You can download a free vaccine research guide right now to protect your child from unwanted, toxic substances contained in vaccines.

 

 

Photo Credit

 

]]>
http://vactruth.com/2014/04/21/nyc-flu-vaccine-mandate/feed/ 226
Eight Month-Old Baby Dies Just Weeks After Hepatitis B Vaccination; His Innocent Father Is Still In Jail 20 Years Later http://vactruth.com/2014/04/07/baby-dies-hep-b-vaccination/ http://vactruth.com/2014/04/07/baby-dies-hep-b-vaccination/#comments Mon, 07 Apr 2014 17:00:57 +0000 http://vactruth.com/?p=16064 In 1995, Bryant Arroyo was incarcerated for the murder of his stepson Jordan and sentenced to life in prison without parole. Since that fateful day, Bryant has continued to proclaim his innocence and has spent the past twenty years trying to find out the truth behind his stepson’s death.

In a letter to me, Bryant wrote:

“I am aware that you are not only a former wrongfully accused parent, but an advocate who has utilized her experience to become a journalist to expose this broken system to assist those parents who are sitting dejectedly, in a cell, in some remote part of the entrails of this beast — without a face, or voice, stripped to their naked existence, unrecognizable to the world …”

I am using this opportunity to give back Bryant Arroyo his voice after he was silenced by the US justice system at the time of his trial.

The Day Jordan Died

Bryant Arroyo In Prison

Bryant Arroyo In Prison

The story begins on Saturday, September 25, 1994. Bryant’s partner, Pamela, picked Bryant up from work around 10 pm. When they arrived home, Bryant went into the house to relieve the babysitter, while his girlfriend went out with her mother and some friends. After working a long shift, Bryant felt very tired and fell asleep on the sofa with his stepson, Kyle.

Around 1 pm, his girlfriend arrived home and asked Bryant to check on Baby Jordan. At this point, it dawned on Bryant that he had not checked on the baby and he went to check. Bryant explained to VacTruth what happened next:

“I went upstairs to check on him and was stunned to find him ‘blue’ and unconscious. I rushed downstairs and yelled to Pamela to call 911 while I attempted to revive him using CPR. I didn’t have any formal training, but I gave it my best effort, as any parent would, given the unforeseen circumstances …

The police officers arrived a short time later. Officer Wettlaufer took over for me and removed baby Jordan from a chair where I had him and placed him onto the floor. He continued to administer CPR until paramedics arrived. Baby Jordan was then transported to Lancaster General Hospital. All efforts to revive him were unsuccessful and he was pronounced dead at around 3:40 pm.”

As is usual in such cases, both parents were immediately arrested and interrogated for many hours regarding the care of their stepson prior to his death. Within days, Bryant was charged with first-degree murder and accused of allegedly beating and shaking his eight month-old stepson to death.

The theory of the case presented to the court was that Bryant had anger management issues and that one day, out of the blue, for no apparent reason, he had taken out his anger and frustration on his infant stepson and beat him to death.

Not one of his sixteen character witnesses, including his girlfriend, backed up this theory, and the following points should be noted:

  • Bryant was not allowed to give evidence at his own trial.
  • Bryant was not offered the opportunity to have any experts speak in his defense.
  • According to Bryant, the only evidence given at his trial was a typed confession, which he signed, believing it to be his statement.
  • According to Bryant, the last person to see Jordan alive was his babysitter. [1]

Some Facts About The Case That Were Never Investigated

Like most children, Jordan had received all of his childhood vaccinations on time. In the eight months before he died, he received:

  • 1/09/1994: Hepatitis B
  • 2/07/1994: Hepatitis B
  • 3/07/1994: Diphtheria/Tetanus/Pertussis (DTP); Polio; Haemophilus B conjugate
  • 5/23/1994: Diphtheria/Tetanus/Pertussis (DTP); Polio; Haemophilus B conjugate
  • 6/20/1994: Hepatitis B

In 2005, toxicologist and pathologist Dr. Mohammed Ali Al-Bayati PhD, DABT, DABVT, who was brought in to investigate the case, reported that Jordan was in fact a very sick baby who had LOST weight during the 43 days before he died.

According to Dr. Al-Bayati, both Jordan’s mother and babysitter reported that Jordan had become increasingly fussy and was suffering from a cold during the week prior to his death. They also reported that he was sore underneath his nose, on his lips and had a discharge from his eyes due to an infection.

It materialized that Jordan died around nine weeks after receiving the hepatitis B vaccine, dying of inflammation of the liver and gallbladder, sepsis, metabolic disease, immune suppression, weight loss and internal bleeding.

If this were not bad enough, Dr. Al-Bayati discovered that when Jordan had died, he had been suffering from the inherited metabolic disease ‘propionic acidemia,’ which would have seriously inhibited his ability to process certain parts of proteins and lipids (fats) properly.

Dr. Al-Bayati wrote:

Jordan was born on 6 January 1994 by caesarian section at 41 weeks of gestation. His birth weight was 5 pounds, 15 ounces. He was taken to his pediatrician several times for regular checkup between 24 January and 12 August 1994. His last visit to his pediatrician was 43-days prior to his cardiac arrest on 25 September.

Jordan’s weight on 12 August was 15 pounds, 10 ounces, which is identical to his weight on 25 September (15 lb and 10 ounces) after he received 410 ml of fluid IV (weighing about one pound) following his cardiac arrest. These data indicate that Jordan lost about one pound during the forty-three days prior to his cardiac arrest. In addition, Jordan’s thymus weight at autopsy was 13 g, which is about 52% of normal, indicating thymus atrophy and immune depression. Jordan’s mother and his babysitter reported that he had a cold during the week prior to his cardiac arrest.

As noted, Dr. Ross performed an autopsy on Jordan’s body on 25 September 1994 and concluded that Jordan was killed by blunt trauma to the chest and abdomen and that the manner of the death was homicide. However, the medical evidence described in Section III of this report clearly shows that Jordan died as a result of serious acute and chronic illnesses. He suffered from spongiosis of the brain (cerebral cortex and white matter); focal Purkinje cell dropout in the cerebellum; aspiration pneumonitis; weight loss; thymus atrophy; inflammation of the liver, gallbladder, and mesentery; sepsis; metabolic disease; and internal bleedings.

The presence of these significant pathological abnormalities in the brain, lungs, and other organs explain the sequence of events that led to Jordan’s cardiac arrest on 25 September. The brain lesions caused neurological, gastric, and esophageal reflex problems that led to aspiration pneumonitis. This situation caused sepsis, thrombocytopenia, inflammation in liver and other organs, deficiency of blood clotting factors and internal bleedings, lung bleedings and edema, asphyxia, and cardiac arrest.” [2]

Dr. Al-Bayati reported that when paramedics treated Jordan, they found eleven circular marks on his lower chest and upper abdomen, which Jordan’s mother stated had resulted from the CPR.

However, instead of taking into consideration that both Bryant and the police officer had attempted to revive the dying child using CPR, the circular bruises found on Jordan’s chest were put down to Bryant carrying out what was later described as a frenzied attack on his stepson.

It is clear that Dr. Al-Bayati disagreed with the hospital’s findings and, in particular, those presented by the coroner, Dr. Ross. All the way through his 40-page report, he stated that the medical evidence supports the fact that Jordan was an extremely sick little boy.

Did Multiple Vaccinations Cause Jordan’s Immune System To Shut Down?

Many of the vaccinations that Jordan received in the eight months that he was alive have since been found to cause autoimmune disease in susceptible children. We know that Jordan suffered from the inherited metabolic condition propionic academia, causing him to suffer from immune suppression. With this in mind, we need to ask ourselves whether or not it was wise to give multiple vaccinations to such a weak and vulnerable child.

In recent years, scientists from around the world have proven that vulnerable children can develop autoimmune disease after receiving multiple vaccinations.

In 2009, Ken Tsumiyama, along with other researchers, discovered that when mice were repeatedly vaccinated with vaccines containing antigens, they systematically developed autoimmune disease. They concluded that:

“Systemic autoimmunity appears to be the inevitable consequence of over-stimulating the host’s immune ‘system’ by repeated immunization with antigen, to the levels that surpass system’s self-organized criticality.” [3]

If this evidence is to be believed, then surely vaccinating a small baby suffering with an already suppressed immune system would further compound his problems.

Another report stated that, according to scientists, the antigens in the vaccinations are not the only ingredients to be linked to autoimmune disease. In 2013, a paper published in the Journal of Autoimmunity highlighted the discovery of a new syndrome, which was attributed to the chronic exposure to adjuvants.

The paper, titled Autoimmune/inflammatory syndrome induced by adjuvants (ASIA) 2013: Unveiling the pathogenic, clinical and diagnostic aspects by Carlo Perricone et al, revealed that, in 2012, scientists Shoenfeld and Agmon-Levin began to use the term ASIA or ‘autoimmune/inflammatory syndrome induced by adjuvants,’ to describe a group of clinical conditions including Gulf War Syndrome (GWS), Macrophage Myofasciitis Syndrome (MMF), Sick Building Syndrome (SBS) and other post-vaccination phenomena. According to Perricone and his team, ASIA is an umbrella term describing illnesses that share similar signs or symptoms. They stated:

“The most frequently reported symptoms include myalgia, myositis, arthralgia, neurological manifestations, fever, dry mouth and cognitive alterations. Moreover, really common is the presence of chronic fatigue syndrome (CFS), often associated with sleep disturbances or non-restful sleep. These shared symptoms suggested the presence of a common denominator which has been subsequently identified in the adjuvant.” [4]

In section 8 of the paper titled ASIA and Vaccines: The Gift with a Bug, Perricone explained that vaccination reactions differ substantially due to the genetic background of the recipient and wrote:

“It is imperative that science aims to implement tools such as genomics and proteomics, to allow the prediction of population sets more likely to be non-responsive or develop adverse reactions to vaccines.”

He continued by adding:

“A number of autoimmune disorders have been reported following vaccinations. These include limited and organspecific conditions that can occur after routine vaccination as well as more severe and life-threatening diseases. It is evident that a live attenuated vaccine is more prone than a killed vaccine to activate the immunity response. Perhaps, this is the main reason why live attenuated vaccination is more likely to stimulate the development of an autoimmune disease or autoimmune symptom. Notwithstanding that molecular mimicry and bystander activation in a genetically predisposed individual have been called to be responsible, the finger should be pointed at the adjuvants. One in particular has raised several distresses: aluminum. Indeed, this has been used as an adjuvant for the past 90 years but it is also an experimentally demonstrated neurotoxin. Experimental research has showed that alum adjuvants have a potential to induce serious immunological disorders in humans.”

Conclusion

After reading Dr. Al-Batati’s report in full and hearing Bryant’s own account of what happened on the night that Jordan died, I believe that Bryant Arroyo is an innocent man and that this case is in fact an elaborate cover-up by the medical profession, the police and US judicial system to hide the facts of what really happened to baby Jordan on the night that he died.

I say this because the facts speak for themselves.

Jordan was an extremely sick little boy, particularly in the months prior to his death. On many occasions, doctors neglected to diagnose that he was suffering from a life-threatening genetic illness. Instead of giving this baby the special care he so obviously needed, doctors proceeded to vaccinate this chronically sick eight month-old baby with multiple vaccinations containing mercury, aluminum and formaldehyde.

When his little body finally gave up and he couldn’t take any more, crucial witnesses were prevented from giving evidence. Instead of being given the true facts of the case, the court was presented with not only a false confession (mentioned by both Bryant and Dr. Al-Batati), but also a misleading and incorrect coroner’s report.

To hear Bryant’s own account of what happened the night Jordan died and the subsequent events that followed, listen to his story, told by him from his prison cell, on prison radio. [1]

 

Photo Source

]]>
http://vactruth.com/2014/04/07/baby-dies-hep-b-vaccination/feed/ 463
Vaccine-Induced Tissue Scurvy Globally Misdiagnosed as Child Abuse http://vactruth.com/2014/03/19/tissue-scurvy-not-child-abuse/ http://vactruth.com/2014/03/19/tissue-scurvy-not-child-abuse/#comments Wed, 19 Mar 2014 05:44:21 +0000 http://vactruth.com/?p=16045 The father of the child in our published photo was jailed for life for child abuse. Many of you looking at the terrible injuries on this small child will immediately assume, as did the doctors who examined him, that he was viciously attacked and it was right to jail his father.

However, what if I told you that it was later proven that this child had in fact been suffering from Kawasaki disease, otherwise known as tissue scurvy, and that his father was innocent?

Well, that is exactly what happened. Due to the wonderful work of Dr. Michael Innis and a team of experts brought in by the family to help, he is well and happy and back home with his family after his father was released from jail as an innocent man.

What Research Tells Us About Tissue Scurvy

Studies have revealed that parents and caregivers worldwide are being falsely accused of child abuse when children develop the autoimmune disease, tissue scurvy, after vaccination.

In a recent paper by Dr. Michael Innis, he stated that:

“Some doctors are unaware of the pathophysiological processes of autoimmunity, haemostasis and osteogenesis and are misdiagnosing vaccine induced tissue scurvy, absence of vitamin C within the cell, as non-accidental injury.”

His paper, Autoimmune Tissue Scurvy Misdiagnosed as Child Abuse, outlined three cases of children suffering from symptoms mimicking those of shaken baby syndrome (SBS) whose parents were subsequently accused of child abuse.

However, it was later discovered that all three parents were innocent and far from being abused, their children had been suffering from the autoimmune disease known as tissue scurvy.

Dr. Innis wrote:

“Tissue scurvy, unlike the “seafarer scurvy” of yesteryear, is a condition in which vitamin C is abundant in the blood but is unable to enter the cell because of a lack of insulin which is required to transfer the vitamin C into the cell.”

He stated that:

“The many faces of tissue scurvy in childhood include sudden infant death syndrome, alleged non-accidental injury, shaken baby syndrome, abusive head trauma, inflicted brain injury, Reye’s syndrome, Kawasaki disease, anaphylaxis and diabetes type I.

All have one feature in common – hyperglycemia, the signature of insulin deficiency resulting from vaccines, and other forms of antigenic stress which damage the beta cells of the islets of Langerhans resulting in hypoinsulinemia and tissue scurvy.” [1]

Dr. Innis firmly believes that doctors are misdiagnosing vaccine-induced tissue scurvy (an absence of vitamin C within the cell) as a non-accidental injury.

In his impressive paper, published last year by the Science Publishing Group, he wrote:

“In all the cases in which appropriate histories and tests were done there was evidence that the doctors either misinterpreted the laboratory evidence or they were unaware of the significance of abnormal tests suggesting tissue scurvy as the cause.”

Tissue Scurvy 2

The father of this child was accused of abuse and put in jail.

A Second Paper By Dr. Innis Reveals Similar Findings

In a second paper on the subject, Dr. Michael Innis stated that it is postulated that Kawasaki disease is tissue scurvy, a disease often found in children under the age five. Children suffering from the condition usually present with a fever, redness of the eyes, blotchy red skin lesions, changes in the mouth and cracked lips, swelling of the hands and feet and lymph node enlargement in the neck.

Describing the case featured in our lead photo in detail, Dr. Innis stated:

“A child presenting with the signs and symptoms of Kawasaki disease was diagnosed as suffering from non-accidental injuries. Investigations were carried out for evidence of insulin deficiency and liver dysfunction.

It was found that there was evidence of hyperglycemia, implying insulin deficiency and the liver function tests were abnormal.”

He continued by stating that:

“Kawasaki disease is an autoimmune disorder following antigenic stimulation in a genetically susceptible child which causes insulin deficiency and failure of the cellular uptake of vitamin C, tissue scurvy, and can be mistaken for child abuse. Vaccines are a proven cause of hyperglycemia in children and may be a cause of Kawasaki disease.”

Throughout his description of the case, he demonstrated how doctors missed vital signs, preferring to jump to the conclusion that the child had been severely abused by the carer, instead of investigating the truth.

In many ways, it is easy to see why this occurred, as the photos accompanying the report are graphic, and to an untrained eye they would immediately raise suspicion. However, the professionals examining the child in question were all ‘highly qualified,’ and should have carried out a full battery of tests before jumping to the conclusion that the child had been abused.

Showing the blood test results in detail, Dr. Innis explained:

“The alacrity with which the admitting doctor declared “trauma level I” colored subsequent clinical and investigative procedures. The possibility of Kawasaki disease was never raised and the ANCA and AECA tests which are sometimes positive in this type of vasculitis were never done. However the presence of hyperglycemia is clear evidence of insulin deficiency provoking the onset of tissue scurvy. The coronary vessels and myocardium should have been thoroughly investigated, as they are a major cause of death in Kawasaki disease.” [2]

Another Specialist’s Perspective on Tissue Scurvy

Dr. Innis is not the only professional who has linked Kawasaki disease to vaccinations. In 2000, psychologist Lisa Blakemore-Brown wrote Reweaving the Autistic Tapestry, a book on autism and interweaving disorders.

One of the chapters centered on a little girl she had renamed Lorelei. Lorelei had reacted extremely badly to the pertussis vaccination and this adverse reaction had been fully documented by the National Health Service (NHS) in the child’s hospital notes. Lorelei was diagnosed with Asperger’s syndrome and Kawasaki disease.

In 2001, Ms. Blakemore-Brown highlighted the case in a rapid response on the British Medical Journal’s website, in response to an article titled A Finnish Study Confirms Safety of MMR. [3] Amazingly, her response was published with a footnote stating that the editor had checked her facts and that the parents of the child had given their permission for the piece to be published.

Ms. Blakemore-Brown wrote:

“In one of my cases of very obvious and indisputable reaction to pertussis vaccine the child in question has been found to have Kawasaki disease, her own immune system attacking itself. She presents as Asperger. There is no autism in the family but the baby had allergies prior to the vaccine. It is scientific examination of cases like this which will enable us to ultimately put measures in place to reassure the public.” [3]

The First Links Discovered As Far Back As 1962

The late Dr. Archie Kalokerinos was one of the first professionals to link vaccinations to scurvy. He first noticed there was a problem while he was working with Aborigine children in Australia in 1962.

While there, he noticed that there was an extremely high death rate among children recently vaccinated. After rejecting the usual explanations, his research led him to the conclusion that the infants were suffering from a severe lack of vitamin C, or scurvy.

Dr. Kalokerinos went on to speak about his experiences worldwide and included his research in many books and papers on the subject. However, when he mentioned his fears to the government, instead of investigating the problem as he had expected, he was met with extreme hostility.

In an interview documented in the International Vaccine Newsletter – June 1995, he stated:

“At first it was just a simple clinical observation. I observed that many infants, after they received routine vaccines like tetanus, diptheria, polio, whooping cough or whatever, became ill. Some became extremely ill, and in fact some died. It was an observation, it was not a theory. So my first reaction was to look at the reasons why this happened. Of course I found it was more likely to happen in infants who were ill at the time of receiving a vaccine, or infants who had been ill recently, or infants who were incubating an infection. Of course in the early stages of incubation there is no way whatsoever that anyone can detect the disease. They turn up later on. Furthermore, some of the reactions to the vaccines were not those that were listed in the standard literature. They were very strange reactions indeed.

A third observation was that with some of these reactions which normally resulted in death, I found that I could reverse them by giving large amounts of vitamin C intramuscularly or intravenously.”

Extremely concerned by his observations, he tried to alert the government to what was happening. However, what happened next shocked him. He explained:

“One would have expected, of course, that the authorities would take an interest in these observations that resulted in a dramatic drop in the death rate of infants in the area under my control, a very dramatic drop. But instead of taking an interest their reaction was one of extreme hostility. This forced me to look into the question of vaccination further, and the further I looked into it, the more shocked I became. I found that the whole vaccine business was indeed a gigantic hoax. Most doctors are convinced that they are useful, but if you look at the proper statistics and study the instance of these diseases you will realize that this is not so.” [4]

Strong words, I am sure you will agree, especially as he concluded the interview by stating that:

“My final conclusion after forty years or more in this business is that the unofficial policy of the World Health Organization and the unofficial policy of Save the Children Fund and almost all those organizations is one of murder and genocide.

They want to make it appear as if they are saving these kids, but in actual fact they don’t. I am talking of those at the very top. Beneath that level is another level of doctors and health workers, like myself, who don’t really understand what they are doing.”

Like Dr. Innis, over the years his conclusions have led him to believe that the trend of parents being falsely accused of shaken baby syndrome is linked to scurvy, and in his final book titled Shaken Baby Syndrome: An Abusive Diagnosis, he wrote:

“After studying more than 50 SBS cases, I have yet to find one where a detailed analysis of the complete individual or family history, or a proper evaluation of all the necessary coagulation/bleeding factors was undertaken. Often, a diagnosis of trauma due to shaking is made at an early stage and any further investigation is considered unnecessary.

It has been known for many years that retinal hemorrhages, subdural hemorrhages and hemorrhages elsewhere can occur in cases of scurvy.” [5]

Throughout his book, he identified vaccination as the main cause of scurvy in young children today.

Conclusion

In trying to help falsely accused parents worldwide, I am currently aware of at least seven falsely accused parents whose children became ill after they received multiple vaccinations. In four of these cases, tests revealed that, far from being abused, the children had been suffering from the autoimmune disease tissue scurvy.

Why are governments around the world burying their heads in the sand and refusing point-blank to investigate this atrocity? INNOCENT parents are being locked up on a daily basis, accused of the most horrendous crimes, and it seems as if no one actually cares.

The evidence speaks for itself: not only are vaccinations harming our children, but that harm is being covered up by blaming innocent parents of abuse.

 

Full permission was gained in advance for the use of the photos.

I would like to extend my gratitude to the wonderful and continuing work of Dr. Michael Innis, without whom many innocent parents would be still be in jail today.

 

]]>
http://vactruth.com/2014/03/19/tissue-scurvy-not-child-abuse/feed/ 33
GBS is Not Rare After Vaccinations: Here’s How Vaccine Pushers Conceal the Truth http://vactruth.com/2014/03/15/vaccine-pushers-conceal-truth/ http://vactruth.com/2014/03/15/vaccine-pushers-conceal-truth/#comments Sat, 15 Mar 2014 09:10:16 +0000 http://vactruth.com/?p=16041 We know that statistics may be twisted into the realm of absurdity, but most of us seem to accept them when considering the safety of medicines.

Here’s a typical example: We ask a doctor who recommends a vaccine about the risk of contracting Guillain-Barré syndrome (GBS), a serious autoimmune condition which may evolve into paralysis. The doctor may assure us that the risk is “probably only one additional case in each million persons vaccinated.”

Why should we accept this statistic without question?

Where do these safety statistics come from? They come from epidemiologists and statisticians whose interest is in the promotion of vaccines and who manipulate the statistics so that vaccines appear to be safer than they are in reality.

How Statistics are Misused to Make Vaccines “Safe”

Dr. Lawrence B. Palevsky, a widely respected pediatrician in New York, gives a more detailed explanation:

“It is often stated that there is normally no higher number of GBS after vaccination than is found in the population as a whole: This statement is more than dubious. We are told that vaccine safety studies are designed to evaluate whether or not vaccines contribute to the development of adverse events.

HOW AUTHORITIES COLLECT SAFETY DATA AFTER VACCINATIONS

When authorities accumulate data in a cohort of people who are given a vaccine or a group of vaccines, they closely monitor them for a period of time to observe any symptoms of illness, usually 2-4 weeks. They then compare the incidence of any reported symptoms in the vaccine study group to the incidence of the reporting of these symptoms in the general population. The incidence of symptoms in the general population is normally referred to as the background rate.

HOW WRONG CONCLUSIONS ARE MADE REGARDING VACCINE SAFETY STATISTICS

In every vaccine study performed in this way by the vaccine manufacturers, they have come to conclude, through their statistical analyses, that the symptoms reported in the study group after vaccination are no higher in incidence than the rate at which these symptoms would occur in the general population. Therefore, they conclude, the onset of these symptoms in the vaccinated study group is not necessarily due to an adverse reaction to the vaccination(s) being studied. In other words, the symptoms in the vaccinated group were most likely to have occurred by chance, unrelated to the effects of the vaccines.

The next step in the process is to then conclude that the vaccine(s) being studied is(are) safe.

HERE’S THE PROBLEM: THEY ARE COMPARING APPLES WITH APPLES

The vaccine manufacturers are using background data from the general population – A POPULATION THAT IS ALSO VACCINATED! (emphasis added)

In this type of study design, the investigators are studying a group of vaccinated people and comparing the data to a background population of people just like them, who are also vaccinated.

We can’t conclude anything about the vaccinated population in this type of study design because the data are being compared to themselves, and not to a set of data from a proper unvaccinated control group. Yet, this is the main type of study design that is used to evaluate vaccine safety. (emphasis added)

HOW SHOULD THE STUDIES BE DONE?

In order to do a proper study, investigators would need to accumulate data in a cohort of people who are given a vaccine or a group of vaccines, by monitoring them for a period of time to observe any symptoms of illness, and comparing the incidence of the reported symptoms in the study group to the incidence of these symptoms that are reported in a cohort of people who are demographically similar, and who are unvaccinated. (emphasis added)

This is the type of study that would help us to understand the frequency and severity of adverse reactions that could possibly occur in a vaccinated population.

This type of study, however, has never been done by the vaccine manufacturers. Many attempts to set up this type of scientific study have been thwarted by the courts, the vaccine manufacturers, medical organizations, and the ideology that vaccines are nothing other than safe and effective, and appropriately studied with the highest of scientific standards.”

This method involving misuse of statistics applies not only in the case of GBS but generally regarding other serious, so-called “rare conditions.”

GBS and Other Adverse Reactions to Vaccines are Under-Reported

Another significant factor which contributes towards the false impression that GBS is rare after vaccinations: The number of actual GBS cases after vaccinations is grossly under-reported.

Only a small percentage of adverse reactions are reported to VAERS (US Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System). It may be as low as one to two percent. Here are some of the reasons why adverse reactions to vaccines are not properly reported:

  • Not all doctors are trained in reporting adverse reactions.
  • It may be difficult to link the reaction with the vaccine. ( Autoimmune conditions may present themselves up to several years after a vaccine.)
  • The adverse reaction, for example, an autoimmune condition, may not even be stated in product information.
    GBS may be incorrectly diagnosed as another condition.
  • There is minimal incentive for doctors to report because it takes time and work.
  • Doctors may fear being contacted by the manufacturer.
  • It may be unpleasant for doctors to admit to patients that a vaccine which was recommended was the cause of the condition.
  • Citizens and doctors are encouraged to report to the manufacturers. This is surely a case of the fox guarding the hen house.

Vaccine safety activist Barbara Loe Fisher wants doctors to file reports directly to VAERS, not through the manufacturer. She says manufacturers’ reports are often incomplete, citing a report in the Journal of the American Medical Association which says that while 68 percent of the adverse event reports on Gardasil came from manufacturers, nearly 90 percent of them could not be tracked or investigated because they lacked the most basic contact information.

Conclusion

Due to both misleading statistics and gross under-reporting, we are given the false impression that Guillain-Barré syndrome and many other serious conditions are rare after vaccinations.

“If medical statistics were compiled by statisticians who had no interest in the outcome, the drug industry would topple into the dust.” – Robert Catalano

 

 

Photo Credit

]]>
http://vactruth.com/2014/03/15/vaccine-pushers-conceal-truth/feed/ 31
Studies Prove Without Doubt That Unvaccinated Children Are Far Healthier Than Their Vaccinated Peers http://vactruth.com/2014/02/26/unvaccinated-children-healthier/ http://vactruth.com/2014/02/26/unvaccinated-children-healthier/#comments Wed, 26 Feb 2014 18:27:19 +0000 http://vactruth.com/?p=15939 A study from the 1990s has come to light, proving that compared to unvaccinated children, vaccinated children were more likely to suffer from asthma, eczema, ear infections, hyperactivity and many other chronic conditions. Furthermore, the study identified that there was a ten-fold increase in the incidence of tonsillitis in the children who were vaccinated, and a total lack tonsillectomy operations among the children who were unvaccinated.

In 1992, the Immunization Awareness Society (IAS) conducted a survey to examine the health of New Zealand’s children. Unsurprisingly, the results of their study indicated that unvaccinated children were far healthier than vaccinated children.

Questionnaires were given out to IAS members, their friends and their associates asking various health questions. A total of 245 families returned their questionnaires, giving the researchers a total of 495 children surveyed. Of these children, 226 were vaccinated and 269 were unvaccinated.

Healthy Children and Ethics

The ages of the children ranged between the ages of two weeks – 46 years (obviously some friends were older with older children). Of the children studied, 273 were males and 216 were females. (Six children were unclassified.)

Sue Claridge, who reported on the study, wrote:

“Respondents were asked to provide the year of birth, gender, vaccinations received, whether or not the child suffered from a range of chronic conditions (asthma, eczema, ear infections/glue ear, recurring tonsillitis, hyperactivity, diabetes or epilepsy) whether or not he or she needed grommets, had had a tonsillectomy, or were shown to develop motor skills (walking, crawling, sitting-up etc.). Parents also provided information on breastfeeding and bottle feeding and when a child was weaned if breastfed.”

During the study, another interesting fact emerged. Researchers discovered that 92 percent of the children requiring a tonsillectomy operation had received the measles vaccination, indicating that the vaccination for measles may have made some of the children more susceptible to tonsillitis.

The study also revealed that 81 of the families had both vaccinated and unvaccinated children. Many of these families had vaccinated their older children but had grown more reluctant to vaccinate their younger children, due to their growing concerns regarding vaccine safety.

Researchers concluded that:

“While this was a very limited study, particularly in terms of the numbers of unvaccinated children that were involved and the range of chronic conditions investigated, it provides solid scientific evidence in support of considerable anecdotal evidence that unvaccinated children are healthier that their vaccinated peers.” [1]

Although governments from around the world have continually stated that studying vaccinated versus unvaccinated children would be unethical, the New Zealand researchers are not the only group of researchers to study comparisons.

Vaccinated Children 5 Times More Likely To Suffer From A Range Of Diseases

In September 2011, German researchers carrying out a longitudinal study surveyed a total of 8000 unvaccinated children from the ages of 0 –19. As with the New Zealand study, researchers collected their data by conducting a survey using questionnaires. [2]

Results showed that vaccinated children were up to five times more likely to suffer from a variety of diseases and disorders than unvaccinated children.

Their results were compared to another German study (KiGGS), which examined a larger sample group consisting of 17,461 participants between the ages of 0 –17.

Dr. Andreas Bachmair, a German classical homeopathic practitioner, responsible for collecting the results of the survey from the website vaccineinjury.info stated that:

“Asthma, hay fever and neurodermatitis are seen very frequently today. A recent German study with 17461 children between 0-17 years of age (KIGGS) showed that 4.7% of these children suffer from asthma, 10.7% of these children from hay fever and 13.2% from neurodermatitis. These numbers differ in western countries, i.e. the prevalence of asthma among children in the US is 6% whereas it is 14-16% in Australia (Australia’s Health 2004, AIHW).

The prevalence of asthma among unvaccinated children in our study is around 2.5%, hay fever, 3%, and neurodermatitis, 7%. According to the KIGGS study more than 40% of children between the ages of 3 and 17 years were sensitized against at least one allergen tested (20 common allergens were tested) and 22.9% had an allergic disease. Although we did not perform a blood test, around 10% stated that their children had an allergy.” [3]

(As this study is a longitudinal study, the number of children being studied has since risen to 13,222. To join the study, you can fill in the questionnaire provided by clicking on the link listed as the third reference at the end of this article.)

Although there were four cases of autism reported among unvaccinated children, Dr. Bachair reported that:

“Of these 4 children one tested very high for metals (mercury, aluminium, arsenic); in another case the mother was tested very high for mercury.”

However, this number pales into insignificance when we compare it to the 1 in 88 children currently being reported as autistic by the CDC. [4]

Other Conditions Found To Be Almost Non-Existent In Unvaccinated Children

Dr. Andreas Bachmair continued his report by stating that their study found the prevalence of sinusitis, warts, skin problems and middle ear infections were also much lower in the unvaccinated children, as were the cases of diabetes and epilepsy.

He went on to say that the results demonstrated that the prevalence of many conditions in the unvaccinated children were also significantly lower. These were:

Other disorders and diseases

As we included open questions in our survey we evaluated the prevalence (of the first 10,070 participants) of some other disorders and illnesses. Unvaccinated children show very low prevalences of the following disorders:

  • Dyslexia: 0.21%
  • Speech delay/articulation problems: 0.38%
  • Sensory Processing disorder: 0.28%
  • Anxiety: 0.25%
  • Depression: 0.12%
  • Bedwetting: 0.12%
  • Celiac disease: 0.12%
  • Gluten sensitivity: 0.41%
  • GERD (Gastroesophageal reflux disease): 0.06%

Dr. Bachair concluded his amazing and intuitive paper by adding a number of statements from parents, which I believe really added weight to her overall findings.

Conclusion

I find it amazing that despite mainstream media and leading government agencies stressing repeatedly that studies comparing vaccinated children to unvaccinated children cannot take place for ethical reasons, groups around the world are taking it upon themselves to do these studies anyway.

While surveys of this kind are often dismissed as being purely epidemiological and passed off as little more than stamp collecting, I believe that studies of this nature should not be dismissed out of hand. After all, many stamp collections contain just one stamp that is worth far more than its weight in gold.

These studies show without doubt that unvaccinated children are healthier than their vaccinated peers and, for this reason, these studies should be given careful consideration by all parents and professionals studying vaccination safety.

 

 

Photo Credit

]]>
http://vactruth.com/2014/02/26/unvaccinated-children-healthier/feed/ 1364
Voices for Vaccines: 11 Facts Show How it’s a Propaganda Ploy for Emory University, CDC, and Big Pharma http://vactruth.com/2014/02/19/cdc-and-emory-university/ http://vactruth.com/2014/02/19/cdc-and-emory-university/#comments Wed, 19 Feb 2014 08:30:33 +0000 http://vactruth.com/?p=15916 Do pharmaceutical companies believe in their product?

No.

They believe in money and power – they answer only to their stock holders. If they believed in their products, they wouldn’t require legal protection from their product harming children through Public Law 99-660 (the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986). Furthermore, they wouldn’t need to force parents to vaccinate their child through mandates (that’s why you need an exemption).

I preface this article with the following, because Big Pharma and the pro-vaccine lobby know their ship is sinking. Parents are investigating vaccines and asking doctors questions they cannot answer in record numbers, which is shooting holes in Pharma’s bottom line.

How do you plug up these holes to stop the ship from sinking? The answer is quite simple: copy what parents are doing in the anti-vaccine movement.

Enter a blog called Voices for Vaccines.

Perhaps you have seen the recent story hosted on the website Voices for Vaccines entitled, Growing Up Unvaccinated?

As you can probably guess from the title, it is a story of a mother who grew up unvaccinated. The woman in the story changed her mind in adulthood and decided vaccines were really beneficial to her health. [1] While this mother converted to the religion of vaccinology made headlines, there is an even bigger story underneath the surface if you just scratch at it a little.

If you haven’t guessed by now, it has to do with the relationship between the Voices for Vaccines website and the pharmaceutical industry.

The website is a marketing scheme for pro-vaccine interests, no matter how much money or artificial it is. You need to know who owns the website and understand the question, “Who influences the Voices for Vaccines website?” or, put in a different way, “Who benefits?”

Let’s get started.

 

Fact #1: Task Force Owns the Voices for Vaccines Website

You should know that the Voices for Vaccines website is owned by the Task Force for Global Health, the third largest charity in the United States. Voices for Vaccines claims that it is “a parent-led organization that supports and advocates for on-time vaccination and the reduction of vaccine-preventable disease.” [2]

While the administrators of the website are noted as being two mothers, the energy, as we shall see, is channeled by larger forces.

 

Fact #2: Task Force is the Third Largest Charity in US

The third largest charity in the United States brings home $1.66 billion a year, according to Forbes. [3] Yet, if you’re not from the Atlanta, Georgia, area, chances are you probably haven’t heard of the Task Force for Global Health.

This fact alone should tell you there is big money involved; you’ll see where the funds come from.

 

Fact #3: Task Force Employees Work For Emory University

Now that you know the Task Force for Global Health owns the website, it’s time to step into the deeper end of the pool.

Before I show you who is influencing the website, you must know Task Force employees are actually working for Emory University. The situation is a bit more complex when you look at the Task Force’s IRS Tax Form 990.

Page 49 of their 2011 document states, “The Task Force for Global Health Inc. is an affiliate of Emory University, and as such, all Task Force employees are in fact Emory University employees. For both the President and Executive Vice President, Emory University includes these positions in its annual market review of compensated professionals in these categories …” [4]

We’ll come back to this important point in a bit, as you’ll see most of their leadership and members have some affiliation with Emory (and also the Centers for Disease Control).

 

Fact #4: Proximity of Task Force, Emory University, and CDC

We haven’t discussed the Centers for Disease Control connection yet, but we will.

Let’s take a look at how closely the following three organizations are connected to each other. According to Google Maps, the Task Force for Global Health is located 2.6 miles from Emory University, and the Centers for Disease Control are located on essentially the same campus.

By itself, the proximity of all of the organizations means little. But there’s more to the story.

You’ll notice an intimate relationship between Emory University and the Centers for Disease Control.

Geographic location of Task Force for Global Health

 

Fact #5: Influence of Scientific Advisory Committee

To understand who is controlling the energy for Voices for Vaccines, and the Task Force organization at large, you need to understand their relationships and affiliations. It’s enough to make your head spin, so that is why at the end of this article I am providing a mind map graphic to make this a bit easier for you.

Here is an example of what I mean.

Alan Hinman is the director for various positions within the Task Force, including his leadership role for the Voices for Vaccines website. The IRS Form 990 for 2011 states he was paid $188,453 for his work. While the program Voices for Vaccines may not accept funding from pharmaceutical companies or government grants, he has his fingers in other pots that do.

Here are a few facts about Task Force director and Scientific Advisory Member Alan Hinman [5]:

  • He is on the Scientific Advisory board for Voices for Vaccines.
  • He is director of Task Force Program Accelerated Measles Mortality Reduction Improving Routine Immunizations in Africa (AMMRIRIA) which is funded by the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation.
  • He is director of Task Force Program Rabies Vaccine/Immune Globulin Emergency Stockpile (RaVaGES) which is funded by Novartis Pharmaceuticals.
  • He is an adjunct professor at Emory University.
  • He was a former Centers for Disease Control Epidemic Intelligence Service Officer.
  • He was the Director of the Immunization Division at the Centers for Disease Control.
  • He is on the Scientific Advisory board for pro-vaccine organization Every Child by Two, with Dr. Paul Offit. [6]


Here is more about Scientific Advisory Member Paul Offit:

  • He is on the Scientific Advisory board for Voices for Vaccines.
  • He holds a patent on a Rotavirus vaccine with Stanley Plotkin (Mr. Plotkin is also an advisory member). [7]
  • He worked with vaccine manufacturer, Merck, to create the vaccine and receives royalties. [8]

  • He has served as both a paid and unpaid member of a scientific advisory board at Merck. [9]
  • He was a former Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) member for the Centers for Disease Control.
  • He is on the Scientific Advisory board for pro-vaccine organization Every Child by Two, with Alan Hinman. [6]
  • He is on the Advisory Board for the Immunization Action Coalition (IAC) with Stanley Plotkin, led by Deborah Wexler. [10]
  • He is the director of the Vaccine Education Center at the Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia. Of interest, Deborah Wexler (IAC) and Amy Pisani (Every Child By Two) are also advisory board members for the Vaccine Education Center. [11]

 

And more about Scientific Advisory Member Deborah Wexler:

  • She is on the Scientific Advisory board for Voices for Vaccines.
  • She is the executive director for the Immunization Action Coalition. [12]
  • The Immunization Action Coalition receives funding from the Centers for Disease Control (CDC Grant No. 5U38IP000290) and pharmaceutical companies. [13]
  • She is an advisory board member for the Vaccine Education Center at the Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia. [11]

 

Lastly, Scientific Advisory Member Stanley Plotkin. He is well-accomplished within the vaccine community, so here are just a few salient items about him:

  • He is on the Scientific Advisory board for Voices for Vaccines.
  • He is on the Advisory board for the Immunization Action Coalition (IAC). [13]
  • He worked for the Epidemic Intelligence Service of the Centers for Disease Control. [14]
  • He was a former Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) member for the Centers for Disease Control.
  • He is an Executive Advisor to Sanofi Pasteur. [15]
  • He is on the Board of Directors for Dynvax. [15]
  • He was Director of Infectious Diseases and Senior Physician at the Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia. [15]
  • He was Professor of Virology at the Wistar Institute. [16]
  • He holds a patent on a Rotavirus vaccine with Paul Offit. [7]

 

Fact #6: Task Force Board of Directors Have Relationship to CDC / Emory University

You should know that the Voices for Vaccines website falls underneath the Task Force “umbrella.” This means that obviously Director Alan Hinman takes his marching orders from a higher authority.

Even if there are a few members who are on the Emory payroll, it is important to see the relationship between Emory and the CDC with the other board members as well.

On the graphic below, the “red star” icon next to the name mean there is an association to Emory University. A “blue person” icon indicates a relationship to the Centers for Disease Control.

Board of Directors

  1. Jane Fugate Thorpe, JD, Chair: Former Emory University Board Member [17]
  2. Paula Lawton Bevington, JD: Emory University Dean’s Council [18]
  3. James W. Curran, MD, MPH: Dean and Professor of Epidemiology at Emory University, Former Researcher at Centers for Disease Control [19]
  4. John B. Hardman, MD: Emory University Faculty [20]
  5. Charles H. “Pete” McTier: Emory University Graduate and Former Administrator, Board Member Centers for Disease Control Foundation [21]
  6. Mark L. Rosenberg, MD, MPP President and CEO: Emory University Faculty, CDC’s National Center for Injury Prevention and Control [22]
  7. Carol C. Walters, Treasurer & Founder: Former Executive Assistant to the Assistant Director of Centers for Disease Control

 

Emeritus Members of Board of Directors

  1. William H. Foege, MD, MPH emeritus, Founder: Emory University Advisory Board Member and Faculty, Former Director for Centers for Disease Control
  2. Howard H. Hiatt, MD emeritus
  3. James T. Laney, PhD emeritus: Former President of Emory University [23]
  4. Former US Surgeon General David Satcher, MD, PhD emeritus: Honorary Degree from Emory University, Former Director for Centers for Disease Control, Board Member for Centers for Disease Control Foundation [24]

 

Fact #7: Task Force Started by Rockefeller, UNICEF, WHO, United Nations, and World Bank

Looking at how The Task Force for Global Health was started is also important. According to their web page, they were, “initially tapped to serve as a Secretariat for a consortium of global health organizations: UNICEF, WHO, The Rockefeller Foundation, The United Nations Development Programme, and the World Bank.” [25]

Understanding the motives of the Rockefeller family, as an example, is perhaps the best understood by author and researcher Lily E. Kay. She writes about the Rockefeller philosophy extensively in her book, The Molecular Vision of Life.

On page eight, she explains, “The motivation behind the enormous investment in the new (“Science of Man”) agenda was to develop the human sciences as a comprehensive explanatory and applied framework for social control grounded in the natural, medical, and social sciences.” (notation mine)

“Applied social control”, simply stated, is the misuse of any branch of commerce, science, law, politics, or religion for compliance to an ulterior motive held by those in power.

Lily Kay continues to elaborate, “With that agenda, the new biology (originally named “psychobiology”) was erected on the bedrock of the physical sciences in order to rigorously explain and eventually control the fundamental mechanisms governing human behavior, placing a particularly strong emphasis on heredity.

The “heredity” that Lily Kay speaks of is a concept known as eugenics, or better known in today’s age as genetics. [26]

 

Fact #7: Emory Owns Stock in Vaccine Company

Emory University stands to gain financially from vaccine research. The university owns twenty percent stock in a vaccine company called GeoVax. [27]

If you look into this company further, you will see the complex set of relationships between Emory University, the CDC, and pharmaceuticals. Dr. Harriet Robinson, co-founder of GeoVax, developed AIDS vaccine technology in her laboratory with researchers from the Centers for Disease Control during her time at Emory University. [28]

 

Fact #8: Pharma Pays Emory University

As a side note, Big Pharma payouts to Emory University are not a secret.

Emory University and some of their employees receive hundreds of thousands of dollars from pharmaceutical companies. [29] This certainly does not make their stance regarding vaccines a philosophical one. Theirs is backed with dollars.

Go to ProPublica’s Docs for Dollars program and do a search for “Emory University.”

Fact #9: Programs Funded by Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation

The Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation is a financial contributor to several programs that the Task Force for Global Health operates. [30] To be noted, William H. Foege, founder of Task Force for Global Health, serves as the Senior Medical Advisor for the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation. [31]

  • Accelerated Measles Mortality Reduction Improving Routine Immunizations in Africa (AMMRIRIA)
  • Polio Antivirals Initiative
  • International Trachoma Initiative
  • Neglected Tropical Diseases Support Center

 

Fact #10: Programs Funded by Pharma

Programs for The Task Force for Global Health is also heavily funded by pharmaceutical companies. [30]

  • Rabies Vaccine/Immune Globulin Emergency Stockpile (RaVaGES) – Novartis
  • Children Without Worms – Johnson & Johnson, GlaxoSmithKline
  • International Trachoma Initiative – Pfizer
  • Mectizan Donation Program – Merck, GlaxoSmithKline
  • Neglected Tropical Diseases Support Center – GlaxoSmithKline

 

Fact #11: Task Force has Partnered with Merck for Over 25 Years

There is an old axiom that nothing in life is for free.

Merck has partnered with the Task Force for Global Health for over 25 years. Through the Mectizan Donation Program, they have donated free pharmaceuticals to eliminate river blindness in third world countries, like Uganda. [32]

Could it be possible Merck uses this “good will” in exchange for peddling their dangerous vaccines for experimental vaccine trials? As an example, in 2012 Merck announced a national Gardasil vaccination program in the Republic of Uganda. [33]

Additionally, in 2013 Merck has launched the Merck for Ugandan Mothers program, spending $500 million dollars to build their medical infrastructure, such as “enhancing” the role of local pharmacies. [34]

 

Conclusion

The Voices for Vaccines program at the Task Force for Global Health may be administered by a few mothers, but they are not the ones pulling the strings behind the scenes. The information in this article reveals who keeps the lights on for the website and the Task Force organization as a whole.

Furthermore, the past, present and future relationships with the Centers for Disease Control, Emory University, and pharmaceutical companies should immediately raise a red flag for any parent. Especially when the message calls for you to blindly trust doctors injecting dangerous chemicals into your child.

If you want to take action and become an informed parent, there is something you can do. Click on this link right now and download the vaccine ingredients.

As you can see, there are many other relationships not covered in this article. If you would like to investigate the relationships between the people mentioned in this story, you may do so through the mind map graphics below.

To save, right click on the graphic and select "save as."

Map of relationships for the Task Force for Global Health. Click on the graphic to see larger version. 

A Summary

Funding summary of who funds which programs. Click on the graphic to see a larger version.

References

  1. http://www.voicesforvaccines.org/growing-up-unvaccinated/
  2. http://www.voicesforvaccines.org/about/
  3. http://www.forbes.com/companies/task-force-for-global-health/
  4. http://www.taskforce.org/sites/default/files/2011_tfgh_990_tax_return.pdf
  5. Alan Hinman: http://www.taskforce.org/our-team/…
  6. Alan Hinman: http://www.ecbt.org/index.php…
  7. Paul Offit: http://www.google.com/patents/CA2065847C
  8. Paul Offit: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K1Hw-Q23S_s
  9. Paul Offit: http://www.newsweek.com/dr-paul-offit-debunking-vaccine-autism-link-91933
  10. Paul Offit: http://www.immunize.org/aboutus/advisoryboard.asp
  11. Paul Offit: http://www.chop.edu/service/vaccine-education-center/about-the-vaccine-education-center.html
  12. Deborah Wexler: http://www.immunize.org/aboutus/wexler.asp
  13. Deborah Wexler: http://www.immunize.org/aboutus/funding.asp
  14. Stanley Plotkin: http://cid.oxfordjournals.org/content/44/1/1.full
  15. Stanley Plotkin: http://investors.dynavax.com/releasedetail.cfm?ReleaseID=231072
  16. Stanley Plotkin: http://www.wistar.org/news-and-media/press-releases/wistar-emeritus-professor-stanley-plotkin-md-elected-institute-medicin
  17. Jane Fugate Thorpe: http://www.emory.edu/secretary…
  18. Paula Bevington: http://whsc.emory.edu/home/publications/public-health/public-health/spring2010/deans-council.html
  19. James W. Curran: http://www.cfar.emory.edu/bio/investigator/curran.html
  20. John Hardman: https://www.cartercenter.org/news/…
  21. Pete McTier: http://www.emory.edu/EMORY…
  22. Mark Rosenberg: http://www.taskforce.org/our-team/our-staff/mark-rosenberg-president-and-ceo
  23. James Laney: http://emoryhistory.emory.edu/people/presidents/Laney.htm
  24. David Satcher: http://shared.web.emory.edu/emory/news…
  25. http://www.taskforce.org/about-us-and-annual-report
  26. Edwin Black. War Against the Weak. Pg. xvii. Dialog Press. 2012.
  27. http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar…
  28. http://www.geovax.com/company/corporate-history.html
  29. http://projects.propublica.org/docdollars/
  30. http://www.taskforce.org/sites/default/files/final_tfgh_ar12updated.pdf
  31. http://www.gatesfoundation.org/Media-Center/Press-Releases/2002/06/William-H-Foege-Fellowships-in-Global-Health
  32. http://news.emory.edu/stories/2012…
  33. http://www.merckresponsibility.com/focus-areas/access-to-health/vaccines/cervical-cancer/
  34. http://www.merckformothers.com/newsroom…

 

Photo Credit

]]>
http://vactruth.com/2014/02/19/cdc-and-emory-university/feed/ 73
New Study Discovers Cause of Autism http://vactruth.com/2014/02/06/cause-of-autism/ http://vactruth.com/2014/02/06/cause-of-autism/#comments Thu, 06 Feb 2014 14:46:23 +0000 http://vactruth.com/?p=15919 According to a new study, children whose last names begin with D, K, or P and are born on Tuesday or Thursday are more likely to have autism.

Researchers at the NIH-funded Autism Cause Discovery Center studied 2,547 children born between 2008 and 2009 and found a 38 percent increase in autism in children whose last names begin with D, K, or P. The increase rose to 53 percent in children who are also born on Tuesday or Thursday.

“We have yet to fully understand these findings,” said James Forrester, M.S., Ph.D., and director of the center, “but we are excited. What we do know is that people whose surnames begin with D, K, or P frequently live between 108 and 113 degrees north latitude and 31 and 37 degrees west longitude. When we delved a little deeper, we discovered that if these same children were also born on Tuesday or Thursday, the incidence of autism was even higher. That’s when we knew we were onto something monumental. The statistics are indisputable, and everyone at the center agrees that it bears further investigation.”

Dr. Forrester goes on to say that although avoiding last names that begin with D, K, or P could be a challenge, doing everything possible to ensure that most babies are born on Monday, Wednesday, Friday, Saturday, or Sunday shouldn’t be as difficult. “It would be easy, for example, for OB-GYNs to schedule inductions on those days,” he says.

Colleague Susan Mahoney, Ph.D., D.Sc., agrees. “So many causes of autism have been proposed, from vinyl floors, household dust, and flame retardant in pajamas to the age of the father, a history of abuse in the mother, proximity to a freeway, and even vaccines. This new discovery can finally put an end to the long, costly search for answers and allow researchers to turn their time and effort—not to mention money—to the real cause and eventually stop autism in its tracks.”

Notice to the readers: This article contains satire. All names are fictitious. Research what is being injected into your child.

 

]]>
http://vactruth.com/2014/02/06/cause-of-autism/feed/ 72
Bombshell TV Show About HPV Vaccines Reveals Cruel Nature of Vaccine Pushers http://vactruth.com/2014/01/29/truth-about-vaccine-pushers/ http://vactruth.com/2014/01/29/truth-about-vaccine-pushers/#comments Wed, 29 Jan 2014 22:53:53 +0000 http://vactruth.com/?p=15904 Refreshingly, there was a brave attempt recently in a popular show seen by over two million viewers on ABC TV to present balanced information regarding the controversial HPV (human papillomavirus) vaccines. [1]

It was expected that to touch on the subject of vaccine injuries and death would bring down the wrath of the vaccine industry. And it certainly appeared to do so.

In addition to opinions from vaccine promoters, there were interviews with a grieving mother who shared the tragic story of her daughter’s death and a brave young girl who described her suffering after the vaccine. Two doctors gave their opinions. While one was in favor of the vaccine, the other questioned its necessity, given the overall success of Pap testing to screen for cervical cancer.

Show’s Journalist Compelled to Publish Follow-Up

As feared, the show’s journalist, Katie Couric, who was probably under pressure from the influential vaccine industry, added a new video [2] and a post script. It appeared on the show’s web site the next day and ended with:

“We do not want to leave our viewers with an irrational fear of the vaccine and for that reason we’re going to continue the conversation and invite a number of medical experts, journalists and scientists to weigh in here, on our site.”

The aftermath in several discussion threads, with thousands of comments on the show’s website, revealed the true nature of many pro-vaxers. [3,4,5]

Kicking of Sufferers Who Were Lying Down

Countless parents described in detail adverse reactions to the HPV vaccines, which disabled or killed their formerly athletic, active and happy daughters.

Those who were in sorrow and pain were ruthlessly attacked by pro-vaccine people who insulted and accused them of telling lies. There were emotional elements when some who were in grief were provoked by hurtful responses from pro-vaxers, the words spoken by the latter being by far the nastiest and, no doubt, shocking thousands of readers.

Shameful Comments From Pro-Vaxers

Some of these comments were posted by people who have been known to boast about their academic and intellectual backgrounds:

  • “The only thing malignant here is the cancerous spread of anti-vax lies.”
  • “Vaccine injury is one of the biggest lies that anti-vaxers tell.”
  • “Really, you anti-vaxers just pull it out of your rear orifice sometimes.”
  • “ I don’t for a minute believe your daughter had an adverse reaction to the vaccination. I think you’re just here for the attention.”
  • “These parents are falsely blaming Gardasil to get rid of some the pain and guilt resulting from their children’s condition.”
  • “These aren’t victims of these vaccines. They are people that desperately want to blame vaccines because they are too lazy or too dishonest to report the truth.”
  • Grieving mother: “I wish my daughter had made it to 32; she died at 17 as a result of a reaction to this vaccine.” Callous comment by a pro-vaccine person who surely had no access to the daughter’s medical records: “I think we have established that your daughter did not die of a reaction to this vaccine.”
  • “Your story is on Sane Vax. I don’t need to know anything more to know you’re not telling the truth. You hoping for a payout?”
  • “There are people here purposefully misleading others with their lies about the efficiency and safety of the HPV vaccine, assumingly because they like to see people die from cancer.”
  • “Stop reading the holocaust deniers of whale-to and stop siding with cancer.”
  • “There is the troubling statistic that the vast majority of alleged vaccine injuries come from people who believe strongly in a magical Jew who did tricks 2000 years ago.”
  • “You have all the credibility of some loon in the public square screeching that the earth is flat, the moon launch was a hoax and 9-11 an inside job.”
  • “Since the goal is to generate fear, accuracy is not important to you. This is why you omit the evidence that shows that you are lying.”
  • “The Gardasil victims memorial is a tribute to one thing only: the willingness of the anti-vaccination crowd to keep passing on false information long after it has been debunked, because somehow the belief is more important than whether or not it is factual.”
  • “There aren’t two sides to the story. There is science, and there is quackery. And a bunch of Munchausen moms looking for attention.”

Comments from sympathizers of the vaccine-injured, backed by serious research, were attacked by vaccine promoters who responded by posting insults and cherry-picked studies.

No Evidence of Safety For These HPV Vaccines

Evidence of safety is not shown by biased, manipulated research papers posted by arrogant, aggressive vaccine promoters, some of whom have no background regarding vaccines, whose prime concern is often to protect their clients’ interests; nor is evidence of safety shown by presentation of biased studies and statistics from Big Pharma’s databases, an industry known to be steeped in deception and corruption.

The two controversial HPV vaccines are Gardasil, which is produced by Merck and Cervarix, manufactured by GlaxoSmithKline (GSK). When there is widespread knowledge that these companies are certainly not trustworthy, there is surely no reason to trust their products. [6,7]

Proof that these two vaccines are dangerous is shown by the intense suffering which gigantic numbers of previously healthy, active young girls have experienced after the vaccines. However, evidence does not depend on numbers. Thousands, hundreds, ten or even one who is suffering may be proof.

Tragically, young boys have started to experience similar fates. [8]

The Nasty Comments Will Not Go Away

Many sufferers were forced to leave the discussions, having been reduced to tears because of ridicule and harassment.

Several of those who had posted cruel comments also disappeared, some perhaps wisely deleting their obnoxious words.

Original images of their comments have been spread across countless countries of the world. The ugly pictures are archived by many as a permanent reminder of the blatant cruelty of those who support an industry which is based on greed and corruption.

More Obnoxious Comments From Pro-Vaxers

How can people who show such shameful behavior expect to be respected? Many of the worst comments are omitted from this article because they are so utterly hurtful that they should not be repeated.

  • “You are an immensely tedious, deluded twat. And stop drooling.”
  • “You are a frigging loon. Go back on medication please.”
  • “Screw it. I’ll say it. ARE YOU PEOPLE ALL COMPLETELY CRAZY?
  • Do you know why people like myself and xxxx and xxxx engage in debate with crazy people like yourselves? And you lunatics have the nerve to stand up and argue otherwise?”
  • “Sure, but does anyone validate your research? Or are you now a surgeon because you read on how to remove ingrown toenails?”
  • “I see the usual anti-vaccine loons couldn’t quit their yammering and stammering.”
  • “I think they enjoy the endless ridicule. They get to paint themselves as martyrs twice. If they didn’t enjoy it, they would stop doing it.”
  • “There has not been a single death that has been conclusively linked to the vaccine, just emotional, unsubstantiated anecdotes.”
  • “The best you people can do is the money grubbing, lying dishonest ‘age of autism’ website.”
  • “I always find it distressing that anti-vaccine activists like yourself care so little for victims of disease.”
  • “I’m afraid that the judgement of the future on you is likely to be that you are in the same class of folk who worried that the smallpox vaccination would turn them into cows.”
  • “A corpse doesn’t make big pharma any money, but fear mongering is wonderful for big herbal, big farmer, and big alterna, which is really the core issue.” 
  • Sorrowful mother: “My daughter has been sick now for two years following her second Gardasil vaccine. She tries so hard to be strong but the sickness wears her down daily. I cry daily.” Hurtful response: “Somebody needs to call the waaambulance.”
  • “Good anti vaxers read anti vax websites as they’re easy to understand. They’re written in basic English so those who lack the education and intellectual capacity to understand the medicine and the science can still feel intellectual.”
  • Parent: “I spend most of my life helping vaccine injured.” The parent cried because of this response, “And yet you’re so bad at it.”
  • “I think it is sad that you think she is damaged because she can’t have children. My daughters mean more to me than their ability to provide me with grandchildren.”

It may well be questioned whether the person who posted the following quote should be reported for supplying false information to the authorities:

“Once again an anti vaxer tells us part of a story without any evidence at all. Some of those VAERS reports were put up by me, they’re false. I proved that VAERS is not a source of information on this subject. So how many of these reports are factual and not anti vaxers pushing an agenda?”

Conclusion

More and more are people reaching each other from all corners of the world and sharing their sorrow because of the HPV vaccines. They receive comfort and information from knowledgeable and sympathetic people who genuinely care. [9]

Many of those who are helping have expert and unbiased knowledge of the vaccines. The numbers of voices of those who are suffering in anguish and despair because of the HPV vaccines are growing rapidly day by day. The world is hearing them now.

 

]]>
http://vactruth.com/2014/01/29/truth-about-vaccine-pushers/feed/ 686