Are we asking the right questions?
The belief in vaccination is held together by the illusion of science. True scientists understand that science is not a constant - it is always evolving and as new discoveries are made change is inevitable. A good example is our new understanding in human biology with the gut brain connection, this has altered our initial interpretation of numerous conditions. The medical community has welcomed this change and medical textbooks need to be reviewed to accommodate these new concepts. What is most concerning is vehement vaccine insistence whereby vaccinology is untouchable - "the science is settled" and no further investigation needs to be done. This popular mantra has been repeated so many times that people accept this false narrative as evidence of safety.
Safety studies are far from perfect. Published literature is carefully crafted using dubious methodology and deliberate interference with data is common practice, as a result publications are a highly curated version of their true outcomes. Vaccine supporters proudly hold this "science" on a pedestal yet this faction refuses to acknowledge the fluidity of science. They stand with the delusion of science and this misplaced notion that science is an unquestionable gold standard. It would be wise to acknowledge the implications of publication bias and scientific fraud. By questioning the "norm" we step out of our comfort zone into an unknown reality where unscripted decisions need to be made. Responsibility is shifted to the individual and this liability is terrifying as parents' can no longer rely on the healthcare professional for their health. We understand how terrifying this journey may be and our hope is that we empower society and encourage parents to listen to that inner voice. Choose to question the fragility of science and step away from the programmed rhetoric that is so dependent on our complacency. Don't give in to media manipulation and make informed decisions for the health of your family. Below we have compiled an introductory article with the hope that it addresses the greatest vaccine concerns and helps parents with their journey towards awareness.
How Is Safety Assessed And Monitored
The first and undoubtedly the biggest issue is that there is no incentive for the pharmaceutical companies to produce safer vaccines. They are legally exempt from being sued for vaccine damages in the USA! In the 1980s, numerous lawsuits against US vaccine manufacturers threatened to destroy the vaccine program; it was in danger of collapse. So instead of investigating vaccine dangers and making them safer, the US government established the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act in 1986. This removed the threat of litigation for the pharmaceutical companies and took all vaccine-related cases to a special "vaccine court", which appoints a Special Master (with no jury) who alone decides if the injury is to be compensated on a 'no-fault' basis. Vaccine damages are paid out of the Vaccine Injury Compensation Trust Fund, founded in October 1988. This provides funding for the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program (VICP) which compensates families who have suffered from vaccine-related injury or death. The VICP is funded by tax payers whereby $.75 or more is taxed on each vaccine purchased. Trivalent influenza vaccine, for example, is taxed $.75 as it "prevents" one disease; measles-mumps-rubella (MMR) vaccine, presumably "prevents" three diseases, so it is taxed $2.25. This system has forked out over $4 billion in vaccine injury to date!!!
Here is the Vaccine Injury Table which lists the recognised vaccine injuries. The list is extremely limited and fails to acknowledge a host of chronic conditions that arise from vaccine injury - any regressive illness, or auto-immune syndrome which manifests gradually over time are excluded by virtue of the length of time they take to fully manifest. It is worth noting that no such compensation for vaccine injury exists in South Africa.
2 – The Health and Human Services (HHS) Lawsuit
After signing the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986 into effect, vaccine safety became the responsibility of HHS. They were obligated to comply with a mandate that listed various requirements to ensure that vaccine safety was being continuously monitored.
Many suspected that HHS had not maintained its legal responsibility and in August 2017 ICAN (Informed Consent Action Network), founded by Del Bigtree, submitted a Freedom of Information Act , requesting documentation to prove that HHS had fulfilled their role. This request was ignored and it forced ICAN to file a lawsuit requesting that HHS provide copies of the biennial reports that they were supposed to submit to Congress (since 1988). HHS delayed this process for 8 months and finally ICAN filed another law suit demanding that HHS either provide copies of its biennial vaccine safety reports to Congress or admit it never filed these reports. This resulted in a shocking admission by HHS admitted - they had never submitted a single biennial vaccine safety report to Congress.
Communications with HHS
Communications with the CDC
Communications with the WHO & UNICEF
Communications with the FDA (FOIA Requests)
Vaccine Safety (White Paper)
The Danger of Eliminating Vaccine Exemptions & Curtailing Vaccine Criticism (White Paper)
View ICAN's website here
3 – Vaccine trials and TRUE placebos
Vaccination is the one medical procedure that does NOT require industry-standard, double-blind, placebo-controlled safety studies. In fact the HHS admits, “Inert placebo controls are not required to understand the safety profile of a new vaccine.” What often happens is the control group is given one of two things:
– another vaccine, claimed to be proven safe during previous "safety" studies, or
– an injection containing the adjuvants.
These very adjuvants are one of the main concerns with vaccine safety; what they should be using in their control groups is an inert substance like saline. Efficacy studies often use saline for their control group but cleverly crafted SAFETY studies rarely use true saline placebos.
The control group is the group that does not receive the treatment that is under investigation, in this case a vaccine. This control group serves as a benchmark or a baseline, allowing researchers to compare the side effects in the experimental group to the side effects in the control group. The results (or number of adverse reactions) in each group are compared and here researchers can see what impact the new vaccine had on the participants. But if the researchers use another vaccine or aluminium adjuvant in the control group then both groups will be experiencing an increased number of adverse events and they do not have a true baseline to compare with.
Lets look at a simplified example; If I wanted to conduct a study investigating the
effect of a new chocolate on weight gain I would need a control group to
provide me with the population baseline and an experimental group
who will be eating the chocolate so we can see if there are
any changes. The control group in this case would
need a placebo like water and we compare this to the
experimental group eating the chocolate. But if I gave my
control group another type of chocolate their weight gain (side
effects) would be similar to the weight gain in the experimental group.
My results would indicate that the new chocolate does not increase weight
any more than the population norm, obtained from the control group also eating chocolate.
This is how vaccine "safety" studies get away with this. Their control group receives another vaccine or an adjuvant which would most definitely skew the adverse reactions (like seizures, SIDS, rashes etc) in the control group which is considered the baseline. When compared to their experimental group with the new vaccine they find the adverse reaction rate is similar and conclude that the vaccine is safe as it does not result in any more adverse events than are already experienced in the population norm (control group). Vaccines are not required to undergo the double blind, placebo controlled gold standard of clinical testing as other pharmaceutical drugs because they are considered biological products under the Public Health Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act.
ICAN points out that HHS’s own documentation shows that only one out of 30 vaccines brands routinely used on the American schedule was licensed based on a clinical trial which had a placebo-control group. Note the brand names, the majority of vaccines listed are the same ones used in South Africa. The number of vaccines that lack true placebo controls are alarming:
4 – Unvaccinated vs vaccinated studies?
There have been multiple requests for a true vaccinated versus unvaccinated study yet it has never been done by the CDC. IF such a study was conducted the truth would be revealed and their shares would plummet with billions of dollars being lost as they could no longer market their lie. There have been a few attempts to compare the two groups, one such study is the Mawson study - a pilot study which found that the unvaccinated were healthier than the vaccinated.
"In conclusion, vaccinated homeschool children were found to have a higher rate of allergies and neurodevelopmental disorders (NDD) than unvaccinated homeschool children. While vaccination remained significantly associated with NDD after controlling for other factors, preterm birth coupled with vaccination was associated with an apparent synergistic increase in the odds of NDD. Further research involving larger, independent samples and stronger research designs is needed to verify and understand these unexpected findings in order to optimize the impact of vaccines on children’s health.
Children's Health Defense (Robert F. Kennedy) has published a paper Vaccinated vs. Unvaccinated - The Science (Part 1), which highlights a collection of published and unpublished papers over the years showing in each case that the unvaccinated have fewer allergies, eczema, allergic rhinitis, lower risk of non-flu infections, lower rates of autism, sleep disorders, speech disorders, neurological development disorders (NDD), ADHD, learning disabilities, lower ratios of children needing special education services, lower relative risk of mortality as those receiving the DTP vaccines, lower rates of developing NDD in pre-term birth children if they were unvaccinated.
Developed many years ago by Swiss Homeopath, Andreas Bachmair, who says, "It started well over 10 years ago with the German site www.impfschaden.info. 'Impfschaden' is the German word for vaccine injury or vaccine damage. I was (and still am) working as a homeopath and was confronted again and again with patients who were injured through vaccinations. As the treatment of vaccine injury is not always an easy task I thought it would be wiser to educate the people before they get vaccinated. That was the birth of www.impfschaden.info.
Everyone is encouraged to do so to build up substantial data.
The comparison of vaccinated vs. unvaccinated uses the survey format. The survey is ongoing. Parents choose either the vaccinated or unvaccinated survey questionnaires. Even if a child received one vaccination, the vaccinated form is used. The vaccinated form asks details about each vaccine given and how often, so that the results can distinguish between children receiving all vaccines per schedule, or only the few they did receive. The unvaccinated form asks questions about health, preferred method of medical treatment (same questions as for the vaccinated). Results are updated regularly and published and can be viewed through links on the same page as the questionnaire. SAVE admins are currently working on graphs for visual comparison of outcomes.
5 – The Plotkin deposition
Dr. Stanley Plotkin is a notorious figure in the history of vaccinology with a long list of harrowing credentials: a vaccine inventor, patent holder, faculty member of 14 different universities and credited author, creating today's bible for the vaccine industry - Plotkin’s Vaccines (recognised by Bill Gates as being an “indispensable guide to the enhancement of the well-being of our world”). This scandalous figure with numerous conflicts of interest found himself at the forefront of a legal deposition whereby New York Attorney Aaron Siri spent a gruelling 9 hours questioning him. In this short segment Siri probes into the safety standards and need for true placebos in vaccine safety studies. Plotkin admits that for determining causality one requires a double blind placebo controlled study. However, when questioned about the need for inert placebos during pre-clinical studies, before vaccine licensure, Plotkin fumbles around the question at hand.
His utterings basically admit that it would be ideal to do so but it would require very large studies covering different age groups, acknowledging that data only comes out after using the vaccine on millions of people:
POST marketing research - YOU are the study!
The questioning goes on to address the Institute of Medicine's (IOM's) report regarding the connection between DTaP and TDap vaccinations and autism. The IOM concluded that the evidence does not exist to deny nor accept a connection. Plotkin stumbles yet again and says, well, as a scientist or a logician one cannot say that the vaccine does not cause autism (as the research is not available to back this statement) but he goes on to make the following statement, "I can say, as a physician that no, they do not cause autism!" So as a doctor, they can lie to parents to maintain vaccine trust.
You can read the full transcript of the deposition here.
You can watch the full 9 hour deposition here.
The Premise of Vaccine Efficacy - Antibodies
The immune system is compromised of two main branches - innate immunity and adaptive immunity.
Innate immunity is our first line of defense that is activated immediately as a pathogen invades. This innate immune response relies on physical barriers like the mucosal linings of our nose and mouth or respiratory tract, our gastrointestinal tract and even our skin. These organs help by producing various defence mechanisms like mucosal secretions, gastric acid, saliva and more. The beneficial responses like a raised temperature or inflammation help mobilize the immune cells required for this immune response.
The second branch is our adaptive immunity, known for its role in antibody production. Until recently it was assumed that this played a key role in the specific response to viral infections, and vaccination is based on this premise, yet recent discoveries has turned this theory upside down.
Lets explore this a little further:
This study investigates the immune response of mice to vesicular stomatitis virus (VSV). What they found was despite high anti-VSV antibodies the mice still suffered fatal invasion of the central nervous system when infected with the virus. Science daily reports;
"Our findings contradict the current view that antibodies are absolutely required to survive infection with viruses like VSV,"
There are many intricacies that are yet to be revealed, textbook immunology is constantly challenged as new discoveries are made. In May 2019 researchers found that breast milk has the potential to confer lifelong immunity to disease and this immunity was not attributed to antibodies. In vaccinology antibodies are accepted as evidence of vaccine efficacy but the fact that vaccine induced antibodies are present following vaccination merely indicates an exposure to the vaccines antigen occurred, it does not mean immunity was conferred. Immunity is a complex process which involves numerous pathways, this is why we see vaccine failure over and over again regardless of antibody titres. Vaccination is not immunisation and vaccination cannot replicate the immunity that is conferred following natural exposure to the disease.
During vaccine efficacy trials researchers merely test for antibody levels to approve their vaccines, the test subjects are not challenged with exposure to the actual disease. Yet scientists are well aware that antibody titres do not necessarily correlate with protection, here researchers acknowledge;
"It is known that, in many instances, antigen-specific antibody titers do not correlate with protection. In addition, very little is known on parameters of cell-mediated immunity which could be considered as surrogates of protection."
Tetyana Obukhanych (PHD) has written an extensive review of the tetanus vaccine. She addresses the same issues with regards to immunity and antibody titres, stating that, "severe and even deadly tetanus is known to occur in recently vaccinated people with high levels of serum antitoxin", she goes on to highlight some studies;
In summary it is quite clear that correlation does not equal causation and this antiquated antibody assumption should be put to the grave, yet science clings onto the idea as it is the only means that they have to measure vaccine efficacy. It is laughable that the population regurgitates the mantra, "vaccines are safe and effective" without truly knowing what they are talking about. The standards used to approve vaccination are deplorable and there is nothing scientific about it. If you would like to read a thorough review of the antibody theory we recommend The Antibody Deception.
It is no surprise that there have been numerous outbreaks in highly vaccinated communities. The fully vaccinated US navy was quarantined at sea for months while they had to wait out a mumps outbreak. We experience outbreaks in highly vaccinated communities every couple of years. Measles is cyclical and we see outbreaks regardless of vaccine status. In 1992 South Africa had 17,000 cases, between 2009-2011 we experienced another large outbreak with around 18,000 measles cases. During the 1992 outbreak cases were reported at many schools around Cape Town in children that were presumably immunised, researchers concluded that primary and secondary vaccine failure was a possible explanation for the outbreak.
" Immunisation coverage for measles was found to be 91%, and vaccine efficacy found to be only 79%, leading them to conclude that primary and secondary vaccine failure was a possible explanation for the outbreak. The epidemiology of measles in Cape Town has thus changed as evinced in this epidemic, with an increase in the number of cases occurring in older, previously vaccinated children. The possible reasons for this include both primary and secondary vaccine failure"
The children were vaccinated but not immunised - vaccination is not immunisation.
Measles outbreaks still occur in highly vaccinated populations because .... you guessed it, vaccines don't work. We currently have an international media frenzy perpetuating the rhetoric that measles should be feared and sadly our easily influenced, susceptible population are convinced that an anti-vax witch hunt is required for the survival of humanity. The fact is that the resurgence of measles is not attributed to "anti-vaxxers", it is a result of vaccine failure and a large proportion of the population that is not immune. Pre- vaccine era measles would circulate and the majority of people who had the illness as kids generated life long immunity. This protected them from getting the disease at a more vulnerable stage as adults. Mothers would pass on this immunity (known as passive immunity) to their babies who were then protected during their vulnerable first few months of life. Decisions should never be based on fear, but rather educated informed consent. Pro vaccine vaccinologist, Gregory Poland, accepts the impossibility of herd immunity with the failing measles vaccine, yet this information has managed to bypass mainstream media as it doesn't fit the agenda.
"Receiving less attention, however, is the issue of vaccine failure. While the current vaccine is acknowledged as a good vaccine, we and others have demonstrated that the immune response to measles vaccine varies substantially in actual field use."
"Thus, measles outbreaks also occur even among highly vaccinated populations because of primary and secondary vaccine failure, which results in gradually larger pools of susceptible persons and outbreaks once measles is introduced.
This leads to a paradoxical situation whereby measles in highly immunized societies occurs primarily among those previously immunized"
The faith in community immunity is what drives the "need" for a vaccinated population, there is the misguided notion that without this herd immunity humanity is doomed. Herd immunity sounds great, in theory, and in communities with wild circulating disease they can attain a certain level of natural herd immunity. But vaccine-induced herd immunity is an impossibility, it is just a perpetuated fallacy that maintains the false narrative. The campaign for mass vaccination uses manipulative psychological tactics by encouraging members of society to vaccinate for the herd. It is regarded as a moral obligation to step up and do the honorable thing to protect the vulnerable. If mass vaccination is to "protect the herd", then how does one explain the new sound bite that is so confidently regurgitated when a vaccinated individual gets the very disease they were vaccinated against - "of course the vaccine does not prevent disease, it just prevents death from the disease".
Initially the childhood schedule had 1 measles vaccine and they proudly ran the campaign to, "Stop measles with just one shot", unfortunately this failed and they added booster after booster yet STILL experience vaccine failure.
One can't claim that anti-vaxxes have an obligation to protect the herd yet in the same breath justify the vaccinated getting the disease.
How to science 101
okay, lets just say the vaccine doesnt prevent
disease but lessens the severity of illness-
the people will buy it!
The Inevitability Of Contamination
To grow a vaccine a living medium is required. The mediums in use today include chick fibroblast cells, chick embryos, chick retinal cells, monkey kidney cells, human foetal lung fibroblast cells, chick kidney cells, mouse brain culture, rhesus foetal lung tissue culture, and sheep red blood cells, insect cells, Madin-Darby Canine Kidney (MDCK) cells derived from a female cocker spaniel and more. When scientists attempt to purify the vaccine during the final filtration they cannot use anything smaller than the antigen size or this antigen would not make it to the vaccine vial and elicit the desired immune response. The antigen is the organism (like measles or rubella) that is meant to alert the immune system and generate antibodies) This means anything smaller than the antigen will get through the filtration process and end up in our “safe” vaccine. There are numerous contaminants that make it through the filtration process and independent testing is not done.
For a contaminant to be identified during the testing process researchers have to know what their molecular markers are, with these markers they can identify them against a database. But researchers do not have all this data in Genbank ( the NIH genetic sequence database of all publicly available DNA sequences) if they don’t know what they looking for they cant find it. Or even worse, they KNOW what is there but do not want to find it. This is how so many vaccines have been contaminated in the past and will continue to be in the future. In many cases when contaminants happen to be identified authorities go on to say they harmless and they presumed to be redundant.
1 - The Rotavirus vaccine
One example is the rotavirus vaccine, Rotarix. In 2010 the FDA recommended that administration of the Rotarix vaccine be suspended as an independent research group found that the vaccine contains DNA of porcine circovirus type 1, a contaminant from a pig kidney cell line. The vaccine has subsequently been put back on the market as they have no evidence that the contaminant causes harm to humans. Please remember lack of evidence is not proof of safety! For our religious groups this should be even more concerning as it is not Kosher nor Halal yet people continue to use this vaccine without this knowledge. Nadia Matthews has written a wonderful response to a South African pro vaccine Muslim doctor here. The Jewish community is aware of the concerns and The Jewish Report wrote a balanced article that addresses concerns from both sides.
2 - Contamination of the polio vaccine
SV40 was found in the vaccine, this virus is now found in some human cancers. The source of contamination was the rhesus and African green monkey kidney cells used to produce the vaccine. This information was available on the CDC's website but after much unwanted attention they removed it. Greenmedinfo covers the story. Here is an excerpt of the facts removed from the CDC's page:
Cancer, Simian Virus 40 (SV40), and Polio Vaccine Fact Sheet
SV40 is a virus found in some species of monkey.
SV40 was discovered in 1960. Soon afterward, the virus was found in polio vaccine.
More than 98 million Americans received one or more doses of polio vaccine from 1955 to 1963 when a proportion of vaccine was contaminated with SV40; it has been estimated that 10–30 million Americans could have received an SV40 contaminated dose of vaccine.
SV40 virus has been found in certain types of cancer in humans, but it has not been determined that SV40 causes these cancers.
The majority of scientific evidence suggests that SV40-contaminated vaccine did not cause cancer; however, some research results are conflicting and more studies are needed.
Polio vaccines being used today do not contain SV40. All of the current evidence indicates that polio vaccines have been free of SV40 since 1963.
3 - The Varicella vaccine
Dr Deisher, an internationally renowned expert who "obtained her PhD in Molecular and Cellular Physiology from Stanford University and has spent over 19 years in commercial biotechnology. She is an inventor on 23 issued US patents, and her discoveries have led to clinical trials of FGF18 for osteoarthritis and cartilage repair, and for Factor XIII for surgical bleeding. Dr. Deisher was the first person to discover adult cardiac derived stem cells, and has been a champion of adult stem cell research, both professionally and privately, for two decades. Dr. Deisher is a plaintiff in the US federal lawsuit to prohibit use of federal tax payer dollars for embryo destructive research. She is a frequent lecturer on the stem cell issues delving into topics such as: research, clinical progress, policy, economics and ethics." Her full CV can be viewed here.
Dr Deisher raises concerns with the chicken pox vaccine which contains 2 micrograms of residual double stranded human DNA. During her Testimony to Minnesota Legislature April 28, 2011 she stated;
" Over 2 micrograms of residual double stranded human fetal DNA are present in each vaccine, which is approximately twice the amount of the active ingredient of the vaccine, which is the varicella virus, a DNA virus. As FDA scientists state in their 2008 publication in the journal Biologicals (Appendix G abstract), the danger of residual DNA in vaccines has been debated for over 50 years, without appropriate studies. The 2008 publication by these FDA scientists demonstrates the real and present danger of human DNA residuals in vaccines, which include cancer, autoimmunity and genomic disruption. "
The full transcript can be downloaded
Del Bigtree's show, The Highwire interviewed Dr Deisher where they discuss vaccine contaminants, you can watch the episode, Genetic Roulette here.
4 - The Corvelva Association
This historic Italian association that supports vaccine freedom commissioned the analysis of various Italian commercialised vaccines. A highly qualified, internationally certified scientific institute that specialises in gene sequencing was used to analyze the vaccines for both chemical and biological breaches. This institute remains anonymous so they are protected from the medical mafia. The findings are damning and destroys the argument for vaccine safety.
Of the initial 7 vaccines analysed, 5 did not conform to basic quality control guidelines with numerous contamination breaches discovered. These range from the presence of biological materials to findings of DNA and RNA from both human and animal origin and the presence of genetic mutations of the antigens as well as various other undeclared contaminants!
The first vaccines analysed that failed to conform were:
Priorix Tetra - GlaxoSmithKline
Infanrix hexa - GlaxoSmithKline
Measles live vaccine B.P -Poonawalla Group
Polio Infanrix - GlaxoSmithKline
Priorix Tetra (MMR-V) findings:
The presence of fetal DNA in large quantities, around 325 times higher than the maximum limit and 325,000 times higher than the minimum limit. Limits that European Medicines Agency classifies as carcinogenic.
They found that the DNA has a molecular weight that meant there are whole strands, with the presence of an entire genome in the vaccine instead of DNA fragments.
There is no presence of the rubella virus genome in the first batch and second vaccine batch.
Other contaminants the were found include:
Platyhelminthes worms and Nematoda
10 more ssRNA viruses
Microviridae (bacterial viruses or phage)
Retroviruses including : endogenous human and avian retroviruses, avian viruses, human immunodeficiency virus and immunodeficiency virus of monkeys (fragments that if inserted into the database turn out to be fragments of HIV and SIV), murine virus, horse infectious anemia virus, lymphoproliferative disease virus, Rous sarcoma virus.
Other viruses like alphaendornavirus and hepatitis b virus, yeast virus.
The above contaminants were present in quantities equal to or GREATER than the Rubella virus that is meant to "effectively" confer immunity. So if your contaminants exceed the actual Rubella antigen what are the consequences of injecting these viruses, retroviruses, carcinogens, fungi, yeasts and bacteria?
Press conference at the Congress of Deputies
Vaccingate in Parliament – January 2019
Corvelva's findings translated into English to date can be found here.
Corvelva's findings summarised vaccine and date order on our page Corvelva Vaccinegate
Did you know that package inserts carry the following disclaimer, "Product has not been evaluated for carcinogenic or mutagenic potential, or potential to impair fertility." The foetal cell lines used have been contaminated with retroviruses, mycoplasmas and more. It is no wonder the pharmaceutical companies refuse to test for the effects, the results would be damning and they could not sell their cancer in a needle, vaccines are indeed capable of altering genes and this may result in carcinogenic effects. Remember, no evidence of harm is not equivalent to evidence of safety! It simply means the tests have not been done.
Independent studies reveal that there are indeed concerns and genetic changes following vaccination is a possibility:
This study - Leukocyte transcript alterations in West-African girls following a booster vaccination with diphtheria-tetanus-pertussis vaccine, found Epigenetic alteration after the DPT vaccine resulting in :
Cell signalling problems
Connective tissue disorders
Energy production problems
Another study - Kinetics of asthma- and allergy-associated immune response gene expression in peripheral blood mononuclear cells from vaccinated infants after in vitro re-stimulation with vaccine antigen. Addresses the association between asthma and allergy immune response following vaccination. Gene expression following 5 in 1 vaccine (DTaP-IPV-HIB) was altered after 12 hours of in vitro stimulation with pertussis toxin, the researchers found
33 allergy related genes activated
66 asthma related genes activated
67 cancer genes up-regulated
25 immunological genes up-regulated
One of the most important things to consider is once epigenetic alterations have been made via a vaccine contaminant the effects may transcend generations, altering the future genome of our descendants.
The pharmaceutical industry is plagued by corruption, the science is for sale. The fact is, researchers are bribed, a revolving door does exist between the pharmaceutical industry and governmental agencies, where legislators or individuals approving drugs and recommending vaccine schedules end up in high positions in the pharmaceutical industry.
Mercks Gardacil vaccine attracted much attention as the approval process was shrouded with shady dealings. Mark Blaxill summarizes a few examples here:
A short account of the recent careers of just a few of the officials involved in regulating Gardasil shows this revolving door in action.
• Mike Leavitt was named on December 13, 2004 as Secretary of DHHS, where he subsequently was responsible most of the critical regulatory decisions involving Gardasil. In January 2009, he left HHS and formed Leavitt Partners, a Washington DC consulting firm that helps its client “enter new markets, enhance the value of their products and navigate dynamic regulatory and reimbursement systems.” In his consulting work, Leavitt could certainly teach his clients about Gardasil and how they could follow Merck’s example in forging a model “public-private partnership.”
• Julie Gerberding was named Director of CDC on July 3, 2002 and served in that role until she resigned on January 29, 2009. Gerberding watched over Gardasil policy at CDC during the period of FDA review in which ACIP put Gardasil on a fast track for approval in June 2006. She also was in charge of the oversight for CDC’s postlicensure safety activities during much of the period leading up to Slade et al’s JAMA submission when portions of the VAERS analysis were reviewed with ACIP. Less than a year after leaving public service, on December 21, 2009, Merck announced Gerberding’s appointment as President of the Merck Vaccine Division, effective January 25, 2010, the minimum interval allowed for a Federal official to assume a position at a company they used to regulate. Gerberding, who once regulated Gardasil, is now directly responsible for its growth and profitability.
• Karen Goldenthal was the Director of the Division of Vaccines and Related Products Applications within CBER, the FDA division responsible for approving Gardasil’s BLA in June 2006. In 2007, shortly after Gardasil’s approval, Goldenthal left CBER to become Executive Director of PharmaNet Consulting. PharmaNet is “a global, drug development services company, provides a comprehensive range of services to the pharmaceutical, biotechnology, generic drug, and medical device industries.” Other FDA executives have taken leadership positions at PharmaNet, including William Egan, former head of Vaccine Research and Review at FDA, now a Vice President in PharmaNet’s consulting practice.
Peer review is considered the gold standard, yet there is growing concern over the reliability of published results. "Peer review is known to engender bias, incompetence, excessive expense, ineffectiveness, and corruption. A surfeit of publications has documented the deficiencies of this system." - David Kaplan. Pharmaceutical companies have a long history of fraud and corruption, below we list a few cases.
In 2015 a former biomedical scientist was sentenced for research fraud in the HIV vaccine trials. Earlier in 2013, the researcher was fired after it was found that the efficacy tests for the HIV vaccine were faked. He added HIV antibodies to the test tubes so the study results showed that animals had responded to the vaccination and developed antibodies.
Dr Tim Errington who launched the Reproducibility Project in 2011 attempted to reproduce the findings reported in five landmark cancer studies with little success.
The Journal of Nature reported that 70% of researchers are unable to reproduce another scientist's experiments.
Duke University agreed to repay the federal government $112.5 million to settle claims that they falsified scientific research at the taxpayers’ expense.
The amount of scientific fraud begs the question, who can we trust? Those with financial interest at heart have clearly failed us, the parents. Children continue to be harmed by vaccines and culprits remain unaccountable.
To be continued ...