Ingredients in vaccines have been shown to harm your DNA
The U.S. National Library of Medicine at NIH in January 2010 published online the “Final Report on Carcinogens Background Document for Formaldehyde.” [1] It’s an interesting document in many respects, especially since it details in vitro and in vivo studies in lab animals, i.e., rats, mice, and hamsters.
Experimental Animals: Formaldehyde has been tested for carcinogenicity in mice, rats, and hamsters. Studies reviewed include chronic and subchronic inhalation studies in mice, rats, and hamsters; chronic and subchronic drinking-water studies in rats, and hamsters; chronic and subchronic drinking-water studies in rats; and one chronic skin-application study in mice. No chronic studies in primates were found, but one subchronic inhalation study and one acute/subacute inhalation study in monkeys was reviewed. [1]
Granted, there was much detail given to inhalation of formaldehyde gas with some studies documenting the effects of adding formaldehyde to the animals drinking water. However, there were no studies performed on injecting formaldehyde into the animals, as often occurs when vaccines containing formaldehyde are injected into infants, toddlers, teens, adults, and senior citizens.
Question: Why no injection studies on formaldehyde? Since formaldehyde or Formalin are excipients used in the manufacture of the following vaccines:
Anthrax (BioThrax), DTaP (all brands), DTaP-Hep B-PPV (Pediarix), DTaP-Hib (TriHIBit), DT (all brands), Td (all brands), Hepatitis A (Havrix, Vaqta), Hepatitis A-Hepatitis B (Twinrix), Hib (ActHIB), Hib-Hepatitis B (Comvax), Influenza (Fluzone, Fluarix, FluLaval), Japanese encephalitis (JE-Vax), Polio-virus inactivated (Ipol), Tdap (Adacel, Boostrix) per the CDC’s PinkBook, Vaccine Excipient & Media Summary, pg. E-2
Probably I’m going to be accused of “cherry picking” data, so up front I admit that, that’s exactly what I’m doing to make a specific point which is, the report stated that
Unmetabolized formaldehyde reacts non-enzymatically with sulfhydryl groups or urea, bind to tetrahydrofolate and enters the single-carbon intermediary metabolic pool, reacts with macromolecules to form DNA and protein adducts, or forms crosslinks primarily between protein and single-stranded DNA (Bolt 1987).
Okay! So what happens when formaldehyde or Formalin in a vaccine suspension interacts with body chemistry in an infant whose immune system and blood brain barrier are not fully developed?
We know that the body metabolizes ‘ingredients’ differently depending upon whether they are ingested and transit the digestive tract, or if they are injected intramuscularly and can become problematic.
The Carcinogens Background Document found the following:
Formaldehyde ingestion results in severe corrosive damage to the gastrointestinal tract followed by CNS depression, myocardial depression, circulatory collapse, metabolic acidosis and multiple organ failure. The toxic effects of formaldehyde in experimental animals include irritation, cytotoxicity, and cell proliferation in the upper respiratory tract, ocular irritation, pulmonary hyperactivity, bronchoconstriction, gastrointestinal irritation, and skin sensitization. Other reported effects include oxidative stress, neurotoxicity, neurobehavioral effects, immunotoxicity, testicular toxicity, and decreased liver, thyroid gland, and testis weights (IARC 2006, Asian et al. 2006, Sarsilmaz et al. 2007, Golalipour et al. 2008, Ozen et al. 2005, Majumder and kumar 1995). [My emphasis added]
Shouldn’t the CDC and FDA be concerned about the use of formaldehyde and Formalin in vaccines in view of the above damage, especially since the report makes this incriminating statement about ingestion? What happens with injection? No one knows!
Numerous agencies, including the Department of Homeland Security, CPSC, DOT, EPG, FDA, HUD, the Mine Safety and Health Administration, OSHA, ACGIH, and NIOSH, have developed regulations and guidelines to reduce exposure to formaldehyde.
Now get this: Big Pharma is making and selling—while MDs, nurses, etc. are injecting—formaldehyde-containing vaccines into infants as young as 24 hours old. Unbelievable? No! Factual.
The key to all the above, as I assess it, is this which the formaldehyde document points out:
Genetic and related effects: Formaldehyde is a direct-acting genotoxic compound that affects multiple gene expression pathways, including those involved in DNA synthesis and repair and regulation of cell proliferation. … In vitro studies with mammalian and human cells were positive for DNA adducts, DNA-protein crosslinks, DNA-DNA crosslinks, unscheduled DNA synthesis, single-strand breaks, mutations, and cytogenetic effects (chromosomal aberrations, sister chromatid exchange, and micronucleus induction).
A DNA adduct is, as I pointed out in my 2009 book, Our Chemical Lives And The Hijacking Of Our DNA, (available on Amazon here) a base in the DNA covalently [sharing electrons from one to another] bonded to a (cancer-causing) chemical. This has been shown to be the start of a cancerous cell, or carcinogenesis.
Now, I have one more question to ask, and it is this: Coincidentally childhood cancers have been on the rise precipitously and concomitantly, it seems, with the rise in mandated vaccinations starting as early as birth (Hepatitis B vaccine is administered then). What connection is there between formaldehyde and Formalin in vaccines with childhood cancers? How does that question correlate with this information from the National Cancer Institute FactSheet Childhood Cancers?
Among the 12 major types of childhood cancers, leukemias (blood cell cancers) and cancers of the brain and central nervous system account for more than half of the new cases. About one-third of childhood cancers are leukemias. The most common type of leukemia in children is acute lymphoblastic leukemia. The most common solid tumors are brain tumors (e.g., gliomas and medulloblastomas), with other solid tumors (e.g., neuroblastomas, Wilms tumors, and sarcomas such as rhabdomyosarcoma and osteosarcoma) being less common. [2] [My emphasis]
Now go back and read what the Carcinogens Background Document found and see if there are any dots that can be connected. Shouldn’t some member of Congress be asking questions or investigating vaccines?
Sources:
[1] http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20737003 accessed 2/6/12
Photo Credit: Andy Lepp