Category: Vaccines

The truth about vaccines risks and failures.

  • Herd Immunity is Grossly Misunderstood

    Microbiologist John Dorman, PhD

    “I do believe that a vaccine can, under some circumstances, provide temporary ‘immunity’ or protection from an infectious pathogen, however, that is where my faith in inoculation ends. Vaccines were never intended to be the first line of defense against infectious disease nor were they intended to be provided under such an aggressive immunization schedule. As most of you are aware, the development of modern sanitation has contributed far more to limit the spread of disease than the vaccine.

    My greatest issue with the current vaccine schedule is that it fuels the fire of viral mutation.

    Consider the 2015 measles outbreak at Disneyland. It had nothing to do with the un-vaccinated, but rather a very simple process of an accelerated morbillivirus mutation. Why do you think we alter the flu vaccine every year? Viruses mutate naturally but do so at a greatly accelerated rate when threatened by the antigens provided through the vaccination process. At some point, the rate of mutation will surpass our ability to develop a vaccine. If this occurs there will be nothing left to stem the advance of the disease.

    And herd immunity is grossly misunderstood. True herd immunity can only result from a healthy, fully functioning immune system. Vaccines cannot confer “herd immunity” because vaccines only stimulate one of the two essential elements of the immune system. In the vaccinated, the body’s natural immune response is impaired, and the antibodies are not as strong as they would have been had the virus passed through the immune system in a ‘natural’ manner, therefore leading to an ever-increasing reliance on developing more vaccinations.

    Unfortunately, the immune response mounted by the vaccine is enough to trigger mutation in the attacking virus. I too want herd immunity, but it will never be achieved through vaccination. Why are so many booster shots necessary to bring antibody titers up to serologically acceptable levels? Does this not indicate that our current science does not yet allow us to formulate an injection that mimics naturally acquired and lifelong immunity? The current truth is it is impossible to create permanent immunity through the artificial induction of a vaccine.

    Many of the infectious diseases we immunize against are simply a result of poor hygiene and or septic recycling systems, unnatural diets, metabolic congestion (especially liver) and persistent immune suppression via pharmaceuticals.

    The large-scale public health innovations – including clean water technologies, sanitation, refuse management, milk pasteurization, and meat inspection – as the source of health improvement and reduction of disease. – Harvard Paper

    These infections are natural in these environments and in many cases, designed and created by and within the body itself to carry out a janitorial duty by infecting and removing all cells of poor integrity so the body can be revitalized by their new replacements. There is enough evidence to prove that vaccines diminish the integrity of every cell in the body and exacerbate the need for a deeper, more widespread infection at a future time.

    Mass vaccination is, in my opinion, bad science at best and will eventually lay waste to any natural immunity of humans at worst.

    The only way to ensure lasting and permanent immunity is through a truly healthy “herd” which is the complete antithesis of a drug-dependent population that find themselves unable to fight any infection naturally. First, we abuse the antibiotic and witness the birth of the super-bug. A mutated strain 100% drug-resistant and now through the abuse and overuse of the vaccine we are forcing the antigenic drift and accelerated mutation of the virus.

    And for proof? I have compiled much research over the years, but it is not possible to point you to a single study or a ‘smoking gun’. It took me several years to unravel the dogma that I was taught and accepted early in my career.
    I don’t know all the answers, but I am certain we are not asking enough of the right questions. I know many doctors, nurses, researchers, chemists and fellow microbiologist who do not “tow the party line” when it comes to the “science” of vaccines.

    The science is not settled and anyone in the medical community who attempts to convince you otherwise is either willfully deceitful or woefully ignorant. We have chosen to roll the dice and gamble with our health.

    What will save us from disease when this Ponzi scheme of mass vaccination and symptom management collapses? I fear we will be left with nothing to defend ourselves against invading pathogens because we all chose to remain ignorant rather than integrate the truth while we still had a chance.

    Because we chose to consume antibiotics like candy and prescribe them for everything under the sun…we chose to believe that vaccination would magically provide us immunity because many of us were too lazy to learn how to build immunity naturally through diet and lifestyle or to learn the symptoms of environmental poisoning. We chose to numb the pain instead of addressing the cause of the pain.

    All of these short-sighted decisions will eventually circle back around and bite us all in the collective arse.

    I truly hope we all wake up soon.”

    Microbiologist John Dorman, PhD

    Resources for Research: 

    http://sm.stanford.edu/archive/stanmed/2011summer/article7.html

    In other news: Measles Information the Media is Suppressing

    Measles MisInformation with Physicians for Vaccine Choice

    nvic.org

  • Opposition to Requirement for Immunization Rules

    Why are parents opposed to the vaccine requirements IDAPA 16.02.15 and 16.02.11 in Idaho? It has to do with the FINE PRINT and a parent’s responsibility. We the parents, expect you, as official representatives of the Idaho government, to protect parental rights to make informed decisions on behalf of our children. 

    Add your voice to the hundreds of others who are demanding that informed consent and parental rights be preserved in Idaho. Email your legislators and the Health Department regarding the Rules 16.02.15 and 16.02.11 demand that they be repealed or at very least be changed from requirements/mandates to recommendations. 

    IDAPA 16.02.15 and 16.02.11, Requirements for Immunizations. These rules violate informed consent, bodily autonomy, parental rights, medical privacy, and doctor-patient privilege. These rules are routinely abused to coerce parents into believing that they are mandated by an executive agency to subject their children to a medical procedure to participate in public school. This is coercion.

    These rules aim to deny my parental responsibility, the most important job in the world, to protect my children and make decisions on their behalf attempting to intimidate and coerce my informed consent. Regardless of your stance on vaccination, no government, even under the most supreme intentions, should attempt to circumvent parental responsibility.

    The authors of these rules must understand the indications of requiring a medical procedure for all minor children in the state of Idaho. The US Supreme Court has ruled that vaccinations have “unavoidable adverse side effects” (US Code § 300aa–22) and many parents have had the heartbreaking, truly unfortunate and life-altering experience of watching their children endure these adverse reactions. In fact, over 4 BILLION dollars have been paid out to victims of vaccine-induced adverse reactions by the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program (NVICP) which administers a no-fault system for litigating vaccine injury claims.

    Consider this: What if you were taking a medication that your doctor swore up and down was 100 percent safe and effective for everyone, all the time, and then you read some legal documents that declared there were billions of dollars paid out in settlements for injuries, including for some deaths, to the parents of children and babies who took that exact drug? Then, what if you found out that the manufacturers of that drug were totally exempt from responsibility, and that they did not even have to test the drug properly for safety or efficacy in the first place?

    I want to make sure that is clear. Health and welfare, through these rules, is coercing parents to subject their children to medical procedures that have been proven to have “unavoidable adverse side effects” that have resulted in over 4 billion dollars being paid out to victims, not by the vaccine manufacturers, but by the US government vaccine court with tax-payer money, because the US government has decided that the manufacturers cannot be held liable for maiming or killing their customers.

    An executive agency, such as Health and Welfare, has no business marketing and mandating any product, let alone liability-free products.

    According to the package inserts that accompany each vaccine, the following are listed by the manufacturers as potential adverse reactions to the vaccines currently available for each of the diseases mentioned by name in IDAPA 16.02.15 and 16.02.11:

    • Immune system disorders: Anaphylactic reaction, hypersensitivity reaction, angioedema, bronchial spasm
    • Nervous system disorders: Paranesthesia, Guillain-Barre syndrome, encephalitis, encephalopathy, measles inclusion body encephalitis (MIBE), subacute sclerosing panencephalitis (SSPE), brachial neuritis, facial palsy, convulsions, syncope, myelitis, somnolence, irritability, agitation, seizures, febrile seizures, Bell’s palsy, lethargy, convulsions, dizziness, malaise, ataxia, polyneuritis, polyneuropathy, ocular palsies, paresthesia
    • Digestive system disorders: Anorexia, diarrhea, vomiting, elevation of liver enzymes, pancreatitis, parotitis, nauseaRespiratory disorders: Upper respiratory infection, pneumonia, pneumonitis, rhinorrhea, cough, rhinitis
    • Cardiovascular disorders: Myocarditis, Tachycardia, syncope, vasculitis
    • Skin and subcutaneous tissue disorders: Pruritus, urticaria, angioedema, Stevens-Johnson syndrome, erythema multiforme
    • Hematologic disorders: Thrombocytopenia, lymphadenopathy, increased erythrocyte sedimentation rate, purpura, leukocytosis
    • Musculoskeletal and connective tissue disorders: Myositis, muscle spasm, arthritis, arthralgia, myalgiaSpecial senses: Conjunctivitis, visual disturbances, nerve deafness, otitis media, retinitis, optic neuritis, papillitis, retrobulbar neuritis
    • Endocrine system: Diabetes mellitus
    • Urogenital system: Epididymitis, orchitis
    • General disorders and administration site conditions: Large injection site reactions, extensive limb swelling from the injection site beyond one or both joints, injection site bruising, sterile abscess, pain, rash, erythema, peripheral edema

    • Other: Death

    I don’t presume that you know what each of these adverse reactions entail nor do I expect you to painstakingly agonize over them – researching the diseases and their symptoms and the vaccines and their adverse reactions, weighing the risks and the benefits, interviewing parents with vaccine injured children, discussing the potential outcomes with my pediatrician, delving into VAERS reports, discovering, reading, re-reading, and comparing peer reviewed vaccine studies (and noting the lack thereof) – because that’s my job.

    Because these are my children.

    They are my responsibility.

    This is my decision.

    I do, however, expect you, as an official representative of the Idaho government, to protect parental rights to make informed decisions on behalf of their children.

    Rules 16.02.15 and 16.02.11 must be stricken or at very least amended to reflect a “recommendation” rather than a requirement or mandate.

    Respectfully,

    An Idahoan Mother

    Add your voice to the hundreds of others who are demanding that informed consent and parental rights be preserved in Idaho. Email your legislators and the Health Department regarding the Rules 16.02.15 and 16.02.11.   

    RESOURCES: 

    SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES

    BRUESEWITZ v. WYETH LLC
    Supreme Court – “Unavoidable Side Effects” Government Compensation Fund Affirmed 
    “The National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986 (NCVIA or Act) created a no-fault compensation program to stabilize a vaccine market adversely affected by an increase in vaccine-related tort litigation and to facilitate compensation to claimants who found pursuing legitimate vaccine-inflicted injuries too costly and difficult. Most importantly, the Act eliminates manufacturer liability for a vaccine’s unavoidable, adverse side effects.”
    https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/10pdf/09-152.pdf

    42 U.S. Code § 300aa–22(b) Unavoidable adverse side effects; warnings 
    (1) No vaccine manufacturer shall be liable in a civil action for damages arising from a vaccine-related injury or death associated with the administration of a vaccine after October 1, 1988, if the injury or death resulted from side effects that were unavoidable even though the vaccine was properly prepared and was accompanied by proper directions and warnings. https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/42/300aa-22

    National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986 
    Directs the Secretary to promote the development of safer childhood vaccines. Provides that no vaccine manufacturer shall be liable in a civil action for damages arising from a vaccine-related injury or death: (1) resulting from unavoidable side effects; or (2) solely due to the manufacturer’s failure to provide direct warnings. Provides that a manufacturer may be held liable where: (1) such manufacturer engaged in the fraudulent or intentional withholding of information; or (2) such manufacturer failed to exercise due care. Permits punitive damages in such civil actions under certain circumstances.  Establishes the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program as an alternative remedy to judicial action for specified vaccine-related injuries.  Provides that compensation awarded under the Program shall be paid out of the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Trust Fund. Limits awards for actual and projected pain and suffering and emotional distress to $250,000. Prohibits awards for punitive damages. Provides that compensation awarded under the Program shall be paid out of the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Trust Fund. Limits awards for actual and projected pain and suffering and emotional distress to $250,000. Prohibits awards for punitive damages.
    https://www.congress.gov/bill/99th-congress/house-bill/5546

  • School’s Lack of Disclosure is Coercion

    We expect our schools to teach our children knowledge of reading and writing. We expect the campus to be free from bullying. We expect the schools to enforce the community standards of respect and telling the truth. And yet, when parents enroll their children into school these standards are ignored by administration and staff. Parents are lied to by omission which is lying. They are bullied and harassed. The full disclosure of the law is ignored. Citizens brought forth a bill that would require the health department and school administration to provide full disclosure of the law. This bill passed the House with a vote of 52 to 17. Yes, 17 representatives believed that coercion at the hands of the health department and schools is acceptable. ) However, due to the structure of our legislature ONE MAN stopped this bill from being heard in the Senate. The power of the Chairman of the Health Committee used his personal opinion in favor of vaccines to keep this informed consent bill from being put to a vote. Senator Fred Martin believes the out right lies of the marketing campaigns via the health department and the school’s administrative policies is appropriate. 

    One mom writes: 

    I was registering my son for kindergarten today (his only partial year of public school before he will be homeschooled). I noticed this passage and the way it was worded when I was filling out his registration paperwork. I came with his vaccine exemption form in hand already filled out, which they accepted. I was really bothered by the fact that we have the right to waive vaccines, and yet they write to parents that by law they have to have their vaccinations. This is wrong. They should say something like, “It is Idaho State Law that you must have complete immunization records or an Idaho School Immunization Exemption Form to register your child for school.”

    I listened to moms coming in worried that they didn’t have vaccination records and the school never gave them the option to waive. 

    If it is our right to waive, why is this not disclosed as part of proper informed consent?

     – Concerned Mom

    Dear Senators and Representatives – If it is our right to waive, why is this not disclosed as part of proper informed consent?

    A hearing last year to require school to give complete information on the law that includes vaccine exemptions for medical, religious and other reasons Senators advised that parents should try to inform one another. The vote against a measure of informed consent allows the school’s are allowed to deceive, lie, and bully parents by failing to inform parents of their full rights under Idaho statue. 

    The CITIZENS want schools to tell the truth, full disclosure. NO MORE BULLYING! This is outright coercing parents with inadequate information on the actual state statute. It should NOT be the responsibility of the citizen to inform one another of the schools deceiptful tatics. It should be the responsibility of the tax supported schools and state Health departments to be accountable to the LAW. 

    Why? Because school officials have said, their goal is increased vaccination rates. Our schools rank at the bottom of education for the United States. Our school system is failing our children. The focus of the school should be to improve knowledge, reading and math and sciences. They should NOT be involved in the medical affairs of families. These decisions should be left between doctor and parent and not be coerced by school officials. 

    WHY WOULD OUR POLITICIANS VOTE AGAINST CITIZENS INFORMED CONSENT? 

    HOUSE BILL 133 

    Amends existing law to require that complete information regarding immunization exemptions be given by daycare facilities and schools to parents or guardians enrolling children.

    Those who voted against the citizen include: 

    Berch, Chew, Davis, Erpelding, Gannon, Green(18), Kauffman, Kerby, Mason, McCrostie, Raybould, Rubel, Smith, Toone, Wagoner, Wintrow, Wood

    Invoking your Vaccine Exemption

    Parents have the right to vaccine exemption with a signed statement from parents. (PRINTABLE COPY) 

     To Whom It May Concern:

    Persuant to Idaho Code 39-4802(2) (Title 39, Chapter 48, Section 2, Number 2) and The Privacy Rule of the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA) of 1996, 45 CFR Part 160 and Subparts A and E of Part 164, I object to the vaccine reporting requirements and invoke my right to be exempt from the provisions of 39-4801 Idaho Code for personal and family reasons and ‘other grounds’ in regard to and on behalf of my minor child, (Child’s First and Last Name).

    This statement supersedes any and all previous forms or statements made in regard to this matter.

    ___________________________________
    (Parent First and Last Name)
    Parent /Guardian /Custodian

    Idaho Code 39-4802(2):
    Any minor child whose parent or guardian has submitted a signed statement to school officials stating their objections on religious or other grounds shall be exempt from the provisions of this chapter.

    SCHOOLS BULLY PARENTS! This is NOT a isolated incident. Please see coercive material given to parents across the state.

    It’s another example of lying by omission. In fact it’s just lying. “No child shall attend school without proof of immunization status” is a lie. They are funded with public money, State law applies to them. 

    In an enrollment package for a Charter School

    At the bottom of a report card in Payette

    At an enrollment fair where they had a SHOT CLINIC…but when asked where the exemption forms were located – parents are required to talk with a nurse before having access to one. 

  • School Vaccine Exemption Disclosure in Idaho. Are We Making Progress?

    No Shots. No School. NOT TRUE! We have seen over the years how the schools attempt to deny, coerce and bully parents. This is why we started Health Freedom Idaho. Nobody was talking about vaccine exemption forms, parents didn’t know there were exemptions and schools didn’t provide the information. It was Health Freedom Idaho brought a bill from the citizens that got the rules from the health department to line up with statute. We have great news! NOW things are changing in the schools!

    We have to keep pushing. This is the time to join Health Freedom Idaho. It’s the time to go to the school board and ask them to be honest.

    If you don’t know what your rights are – you are going to lose your right. You only retain the rights you know you have!

    For more information about vaccine exemptions 

    And a huge thank you to the Bonneville School District for being transparent with vaccine exemptions!!! Go tell them thank you!!

    (Around the 29 min mark where they discuss exemptions)

    https://www.facebook.com/bjsd93/videos/368466380712148?s=573969919&v=e&sfns=xmo

    We want to continue to spread the word, educate parents and encourage other school districts to stand up for informed consent. HELP US! We want to share resources/information. Help us cover the cost of printing and stamps and the advertising necessary to cross the censorship barrier.

    DONATE HERE

  • BE HEARD! Health Department Hearings Across Idaho

    Immunization Hearings. Please send 3 quick emails today!

    We need your support.  The Idaho Department of Health and Welfare will be hosting 6 public hearings around the state and one of the important topics will be immunizations, vaccine exemptions, CPS, and medical testing requirements for infants . We encourage you to email a letter and let the Idaho Health Department and your legislators know that you believe that immunizations should be a parental choice, that you are concerned about the overstep of the Health Department through the CPS and/or your concerns about forced medical testing on your newborn. There are hundreds of rules that are open for public comment. You are available to speak on any or all that concern you.

    (How did this happen? watch a brief video here)

    Anyone may submit written comments regarding the proposed rule making. Those comments should be submitted in writing. We have made it easy simply COPY/Paste EMAILS Addresses and compose your email. Be sure to make plans to attend the public hearings, read your comments and support others who are doing the same. 

    COMMENTS SHOULD GO TO THE FOLLOWING PEOPLE: 

    1. Department of Health dhwrules@dhw.idaho.gov  The executive department that makes the rules and is required to receive public input
    2. Your legislators  It’s so important to include your Representatives and Senator in this email as they are your voice at the Capitol and need to know your concerns in these matters. If you are uncertain of which district you reside you can find their email addresses of your personal legislators <find them here> 
    3. House and Senate Health Committees  who will ultimately vote to approve or reject all or parts of the rules in question

    KEEPING THE RULE MAKERS ACCOUNTABLE

    HFI Concerns with IDAPA RULES…

    The department of Health is under the executive branch and gets to ‘make the rules’ that pertain to the laws the legislators vote on in session. We have seen in the past that the Department stretches the law past its intention in an attempt to bully parents into compliance under their terms and not those of the statute. With closer examination, it appears the Health Department’s administrative rules are rewritten AFTER the legislator’s vote upon them. Does this mean that those ‘writing the rules’ aren’t following the rules?? 

    Whose suppose to keep them accountable? WE ARE- the public! 

    WHAT DO I SAY?

    These are some samples of rules that are unlawful and unconstitutional. Your comments should not be limited to these issues below. Look through the rules and determine if there are other areas that you feel should be brought to the attention of our legislators. (Link to the RULES FROM HEALTH AND WELFARE) 

    Here is a link to several letters sent by active health freedom Idaho members who volunteered to share. 

    Health Freedom Idaho believes that the ultimate responsibility to protect the health and the welfare falls not on bureaucrats or politicians but on parents. In order to preserve informed consent, bodily autonomy, parental rights, medical privacy, and doctor-patient privilege ALL medical decisions should be left in the hands of parents and their doctor and not mandated by the state. 

    Here are an example of rules HFI is concerned about:

    RE: IDAPA 16 Department of Health and Welfare Docket 16-0000-1900

    16.02.15 and 16.02.11 Requirements for Immunizations

    36 required school vaccinations

    31 required daycare vaccines (by the age of 2)

    These rules violate informed consent, bodily autonomy, parental rights, medical privacy, and doctor-patient privilege.These rules represent a clear violation of human rights as they go beyond the scope of the law and seek to coerce and bully parents into compliance. Forcing the injection of liability-free medical products into an individual in order to participate in education in public and private schools and participate in private business via daycares.

    • Rules 16.02.15 and 16.02.11 must be stricken or at very least amended to reflect a “recommendation” rather than a requirement/mandate. The Health and Welfare Department must be more transparent and specify that exemptions are available.

    16.02.11 Meningitis for 12th graders for school year 2020/2021

    Additional Meningitis vaccination for 12th grade students

    This additional vaccine requirement was added for the 20-21 school year under the guise that it would protect potential college-bound students from the exceedingly rare disease that affects less than 400 individuals a year. The Health Department reports that LESS THAN 3 individuals annually in Idaho and NO reported students have been effected in the last decade. The CDC reports that 92% of the college students who got meningitis WERE VACCINATED with this vaccine. Not surprisingly, 99.9% of those who were in favor of the vaccine at public hearings stood to gain financially from the newest Idaho vaccine mandate.The parents of the 30,000 students a year who are now mandated to receive an additional vaccine are not being provided true Informed Consent.  

    • Additional Vaccination Mandate must be stricken or at very least amended to reflect a “recommendation” rather than a requirement/mandate. The Health and Welfare Department must be more transparent and specify that exemptions are available.

    IDAPA 16.03.09 Department of Health & Welfare Medicaid Basic Plan Benefits

    Each participant must demonstrate that he has received recommended wellness visits and immunizations for his age prior to earning any points. (3-30-07)

    Implying to an already vulnerable population they MUST use a liability-free medical products in compliance with ACIP vaccine schedule discriminates against religious/personal beliefs and personal autonomy.

    • Rule 16.02.09 must be stricken. Health and Welfare must be more transparent of parental rights and Idaho law and in no way punish or reward an at-risk population for elective medical procedures.

    IDAPA 16.06.12 – Rules Governing the Department of Health and Welfare Idaho Child Care Program (ICCP)

    ICCP can only receive child care benefits for eligible children. A child is eligible for child care benefits under the following conditions: (4-2-08) 01. Immunizations Requirements. A child must be immunized in accordance with IDAPA 16.02.11, “Immunization Requirements for Children Attending Licensed Daycare Facilities in Idaho.” Child care benefits can continue during a reasonable period necessary for the child to be immunized. Parents must provide evidence that the child has been immunized unless the child is attending school. (4-2-08)

    Implying to an already vulnerable population they MUST use a liability-free medical products in compliance with ACIP vaccine schedule discriminates against religious/personal beliefs and personal autonomy. The Health Department should at no time withhold benefits for at-risk families in order to force compliance for an elective liability-free medical procedure. 

    • Rule 16.06.12 must be stricken. Health and Welfare must be more transparent of parental rights and Idaho law and in no way punish or reward an at-risk population for elective medical procedures.

    16.02.12 – PROCEDURES AND TESTING TO BE PERFORMED ON NEWBORN INFANTS

    The government-mandated medical procedure must be weighed against the individual’s constitutionally protected interests in personal autonomy and bodily integrity. Mandated testing includes blood draw to test for 47 conditions. All medical decisions need to be left between doctor and parent and should not involve bureaucrats or legislators. 

    • Rule 16.02.12 Should be stricken or at very least written as a recommendation NOT state mandated medical procedures. 

    RE: IDAPA 16 Department of Health and Welfare Docket 16-0000-1900f

    Rules 16.06.01(559)(01) and (02) Rules for Conducting a CPS Investigation

    Are two rules that state anytime CPS is conducting an investigation or comprehensive safety assessment (01) an interview of the child must be conducted. CPS can not constitutionally require an interview of a child under the 4th and 14 amendments of the Constitution. Our bill of rights protects us from the government in areas of search and seizure.

    • Rule 16.06.01 (559) 01 and 02 should be stricken as unconstitutional. These rules allow agencies to operate outside the scope of the U.S. Constitution violating rights protected by the 4th and 14th amendments.

    Make the MOST of your time and efforts

    Be sure to CC your email all the Health and Welfare Committee legislators, your personal legislators <find them here> and Health Freedom Idaho) 

    <COPY/Paste EMAILS Addresses>

    BE BOLD! ATTEND THE HEARING!

    Can’t speak in front of people?? Be there for moral support. Smile at those speaking in favor of health freedom and parental choice. This is important in ensuring that parent rights, informed consent are preserved in Idaho.

    Hearings dates, locations and times.

    This is important in ensuring that parent rights, informed consent are preserved in Idaho.

    Boise
    Thursday, Aug 22    1:00pm-4:00pm MT
    Medicaid Central Office
    3232 Elder Street/rooms D east and west

    Idaho Falls
    Friday, Aug 23     1:00pm-4:00pm MT
    Region VII Office
    150 Shoup Ave/2nd floor conference room

    Coeur d’Alene
    Monday, Aug 26    9:00am-Noon PT
    Region I Office
    1120 Ironwood Drive/lower level conference room

    Lewiston
    Tuesday, Aug 27    10:00am-Noon PT
    Lewiston State Office Building
    1118 F Street/3rd floor conference room

    Grangeville
    Tuesday, Aug 27    3:00pm-4:30pm PT  
    Grangeville Senior Center
    108 Truck Route Road

    Twin Falls
    Wednesday, Aug 28    1:00pm-4:00pm MT  
    Region V Office
    601 Poleline Road/main conference room

  • U.S. Measles Outbreak Boosts Vaccine Sales By More Than 50%

    There is nothing like a good “measles outbreak” to boost sales when you have a monopoly on the only measles vaccine available, and corporate-funded mainstream media does almost all of your marketing for free, by singing the praises of the vaccine while never mentioning potential side effects or criminal cases currently in place over corruption surrounding the development of the vaccine. 

    Given the fact that U.S. law prevents anyone from suing Merck if a vaccine injury or death occurs from their vaccines, and that the U.S. Government via the CDC is the largest purchaser of vaccines to the tune of $5 billion per year, the vaccine industry has become perhaps the most lucrative market in the history of the world. – Health Impact News

    CNBC reports: 

    Pharmaceutical giant Merck said Tuesday that high consumer demand for its measles vaccines, amid the largest U.S. outbreak in decades, helped boost sales in its second quarter. Even though a portion of the outbreak, up to 38% by some estimates, were vaccine created measles cases.

    Sales of children’s vaccines, which includes the New Jersey-based company’s MMR vaccine, for measles, mumps and rubella, jumped 58% year over year to $675 million, Merck announced in its second-quarter earnings report Tuesday. Merck, which is the sole U.S. supplier of measles vaccines, said the strong growth was due in part to this year’s measles outbreak, which was the largest in the U.S. since 1992.

    The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention has reported 1,164 individual cases of measles as of July 25. The CDC said the new cases represented a 1.4% increase in the number of cases from the previous week. Officials had officially declared measles eliminated in 2000, but warned that if cases continued to climb this year the U.S. may lose its “eliminated” status.

    Merck has a monopoly and they are capitalizing on it every chance they get, much to the delight and enrichment of their shareholders. Maybe it’s not only about the money. But it’s about the money.

    If it’s not obvious to you by now that mandating a for-profit medical product, shaming parents of healthy children who choose not to give their money to Big Pharma, and fomenting fear about what has always been a relatively mild childhood illness is a **bonanza** for big business, we’ve got some swampland to sell you in Florida.
    – Jennifer Margulis via facebook

    RESOURCES:

    — CNBC’s Angelica LaVito contributed to this report.

    https://vaccineimpact.com/2019/merck-profits-soar-as-mmr-measles-vaccine-increases-27-to-496-million-in-2019/

    https://www.cnbc.com/amp/2019/07/30/nasty-us-measles-outbreak-helps-boost-merck-vaccine-sales-in-q2.html.

  • Do All Religious Leaders Endorse Abortion Tainted Vaccinations?

    Devout parents who are worried about vaccines object to ingredients containing residual material from pigs or morally reprehensible DNA strands from aborted human fetuses. The New York Times published an article stating, “Top Jewish and Islamic scholars, the Vatican endorse vaccinations.” 

    Religious authorities have ‘meticulously studied how vaccines are developed and what is in them,’” says the New York Times. “and still have ruled that they do not violate Jewish, Islamic or Catholic law” or Christian traditions. (source) 

    In reality, State governments agencies target religious leaders. They are fed half-truths via packages of media materials on the topic. They are strongly encouraged to sway their parishioners to comply with state-mandated liability-free medical products that violate the body and contradict scriptures. Avoiding persecution by the state, some religious leaders ‘vigorously endorse vaccination’ and often avoid discussions with dissenting parishioners on the topic. Dodging church conflict, they parrot the public health propaganda of ‘safe and effective’ and ‘greater good’ mantra. 

    What of the concerns from members who abhor abortion and reject the notion that injecting their healthy child with a disease mixed with toxins created on the body parts of aborted human beings?

    Here is a recent example attempting to stem the tide of concern of millions of Christians regarding this issue author Joe Carter writes in the Gospel Coalition Article on vaccinations:

    “There are currently no vaccines created by using cells directly taken from the bodies of aborted fetuses. However, there are some vaccines created from cell lines (such as WI-38, MRC-5, HEK-293, PER C6, and WI-26) that were derived from tissue taken from aborted fetuses from the 1960s.”

    You could phrase what Joe Carter stated another way: Aborted baby cell strains are used in vaccine development for vaccines currently on the CDC schedule.

    Updated to include: The fact is the two COVID 19 being distributed under FDA Emergency Authorization are also manufactured using the aborted fetal cell line HEK-293. Moderna in numerous patents in the fundamental design of mRNA technology and in the original vaccine research, development, production, and testing. (see references here)

    Fetal Cells & Vaccines

    The screen shot below is taken from the CDC Vaccine Excipient Summary. This table lists substances acknowledged by the vaccine manufacturer “as being contained in the final formulation of each vaccine.” As you can see below in the chicken pox vaccine example, MRC-5, “human diploid cells, including DNA & protein” is included in the list of ingredients.

    The bottom line is that vaccine developers used cells of aborted babies to create the vaccines we use today. They were not passive actors, and according to the manufacturers themselves, certain elements from those aborted babies remain present in the vaccines. (See resources below regarding the aborted human DNA is present in vaccinations given today)

    According to the CDC these vaccines developed from aborted baby cell strains are:

    • Adenovirus
    • DTaP-IPV/Hib (Pentacel)
    • DTaP-IPV (Quadracel)
    • Hep A (Havrix)
    • Hep A (Vaqta)
    • Hep A/Hep B (Twinrix)
    • MMR (MMR-II)
    • MMRV (ProQuad)
    • Rabies (Imovax)
    • Varicella (Varivax)
    • Zoster (Shingles – Zostavax).

    There are no U.S. approved vaccine alternatives which were not developed via abortion for Adenovirus, Chickenpox, Hepatitis A, Measles, Mumps, or Rubella.

    The cell lines from two dead babies whose parents partnered with the vaccine developers are referred to (dehumanizingly) as MRC-5 (we’ll call him Jack – he was a boy) and WI-38 (we’ll call her Jill, she was a girl). Who were they? Both were about 3 and a half months when they were tragically killed in the womb. We are told Jill’s parents had her killed because they already had too many children, and Jack’s mother had him killed for “psychiatric” reasons. Neither child was deemed to be unhealthy in any way. Here is an MMR vaccine insert which lists Jill (Wi-38) under the description.

    These candidates are not selected after the abortion but are meticulously screened prior to. Dr. Stanley Plotkin who developed the Rubella vaccine by using Jill’s cells testifies:

    “This fetus was chosen by Dr. Sven Gard, specifically for this purpose. Both parents are known, and unfortunately for the story, they are married to each other, still alive and well, and living in Stockholm, presumably. The abortion was done because they felt they had too many children. There were no familial diseases in the history of either parent, and no history of cancer specifically in the families.”

    Plotkin further testified that in one study alone 76 aborted babies were similarly used in the preparatory work for a single study he participated in and that he performed medical experiments on orphans, the mentally retarded, and babies whose mothers were in prison.

    Dr Peter McCullough, an Immunologist, wrote the book, The Fetus As Transplant Donor: The Scientific, Social, and Ethical Perspectives, on the methods used in harvesting fetal tissue in Sweden. He writes:

    “They would puncture the sac of a pregnant woman at 14 to 16 weeks, put a clamp on the head of the baby, pull the head down into the neck of the womb, drill a hole into the baby’s head and attach a suction machine to remove the brain cells… At 16 to 21 weeks, they would do prostaglandin abortions where a chemical is injected into the womb causing the woman to go into mini-labor and pass the baby. Fifty percent of the time, the baby would be born alive, but that didn’t stop them. They would simply open up the abdomen of the baby with no anesthesia, and take out the liver and kidneys, etc.”

    Christian Leaders Claim Abortion Tainted Vaccines Morally Acceptable based on Faulty Assumptions

    “The key consideration in whether using currently available vaccines is licit or immoral is whether there is material cooperation with the evil act of abortion. If the abortion was conducted in order to harvest tissues that were to be used for the vaccine, then it would clearly be immoral. But in the case of the vaccines listed above, the abortion was carried out for other reasons and the tissue was acquired post-mortem for the purpose medical research.”

    Dr. McCullough and Dr. Plotkin’s testimony make it clear : It’s not like these researchers would just passively sort through discarded baby parts. They were actively involved in aborting the babies in such a way as to maximize access to “fresh” tissue. 

    Catholic Religious Leaders “wash their hands of guilt” and encourage vaccination for ‘common good’

    The National Catholic Bioethics Center : “Upon use, one should register a complaint with the manufacturer of the products as an acceptable form of conscientious objection,” the statement says. “This signals opposition to the wider, morally reprehensible practice of using the unborn as little more than research material for science.”

    “There is no moral obligation to register such a complaint in order to use these vaccines,” it says, adding that “it should be obvious that vaccine use in these cases does not contribute directly to the practice of abortion since the reasons for having an abortion are not related to vaccine preparation.”

    The above statement the Catholic leaders completely ignore the proof that abortions were performed in a manner to specifically use the innocent unborn as spare parts for the intent purpose of the research and manufacturing vaccination.  

    According to the National Network for Immunization Information (NNii) the reason they used aborted babies is because “human cells are preferred because cells derived from animal organs sometimes may carry animal viruses that could harm people.”

    Others, in agreement with McCullough, dispute the need for such practices to develop vaccines.

    Either way, if you adopt the CDC vaccination schedule, you can’t avoid abortion tainted vaccinations.

    Above is an excerpt of a 5 part series on Christians and Vaccinations that can be found at NewCityTimes.com

    Vaccine Exemptions Protect Religious Freedom

    RESOURCES: 
    No, Aborted Fetal Cells were Not filtered out of the Final Vaccine:

    part part 1 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZsCAUKUTb20

    part 2 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I5b9xsGZs1E

    part 3: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-UVZSs9vgYQ

    part 4 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M5y9mYQQmt4

    A portion of the resources from COGforlife.org website (posted her as a redundancy visit their site for the full article) 

    Quoting:

    Importantly, the new data supports NIAID’s approach to a gene-based vaccine for COVID-19 and will also be useful in other vaccine approaches including protein-based vaccines and other nucleic acid or vector-based delivery approaches. NIAID scientists designed the stabilized spike antigen based on previous knowledge obtained from studying other coronavirus spike structures. NIAID and the biotechnology company Moderna, based in Cambridge, Massachusetts, are developing a messenger RNA (mRNA) vaccine, which directs the body’s cells to express the spike in its prefusion conformation to elicit an immune response.

    And the Materials and Methods show the 293 cells.

    https://science.sciencemag.org/content/sci/suppl/2020/02/18/science.abb2507.DC1/abb2507-Wrapp-SM.pdf

    And if that is not enough, Moderna’s use of HEK is not new…previous patents in 2015 show its use as well.  Use the Find function and type in HEK in the search…it’s listed 76 times.

    http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO1&Sect2=HITOFF&d=PALL&p=1&u=%2Fnetahtml%2FPTO%2Fsrchnum.htm&r=1&f=G&l=50&s1=8,999,380.PN.&OS=PN/8,999,380&RS=PN/8,999,380

    Also – more here showing how HEK-293 cells are used with the Spike S protein:

    https://www.sinobiological.com/research/virus/human-coronavirus-spike

    https://www.acrobiosystems.com/P3098-2019-nCoV-%28COVID-19%29-S-protein-Full-Length-%28R683A-R685A%29-His-Tag.html

    https://www.biovendor.com/sars-cov-2-2019-ncov-spike-glycoprotein-s1-hek293-recombinant-2?utm_source=bing&utm_medium=organic

    Now, if you still need convincing that Moderna is using HEK-293 cells, this  is straight from their own website:

    https://www.modernatx.com/newsroom/publications

    And from their Publications page, see this link:
    https://www.nature.com/articles/s41541-020-0163-z

    Since it deals with lung infection (which Covid-19 causes) it seems like a pretty good reference to what they are doing.  The use of 293 cells is cited in several places including in the supplementary information.  That is linked here:

    https://static-content.springer.com/esm/art%3A10.1038%2Fs41541-020-0163-z/MediaObjects/41541_2020_163_MOESM1_ESM.pdf

    The very first paragraph shows the use of 293 cells IN THE CONSTRUCTION. The authors of the study are both Merck and Moderna.

    And in July 2020: An mRNA Vaccine against SARS-CoV-2 — Preliminary Report

    NEW ENGLAND JOURNAL OF MEDICINE

    https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa2022483

    Which clearly states they are using the Spike protein which some have tried to deny.

    Under  Vaccine – Quoting:

    The mRNA-1273 vaccine candidate, manufactured by Moderna, encodes the S-2P antigen, consisting of the SARS-CoV-2 glycoprotein with a transmembrane anchor and an intact S1–S2 cleavage site. S-2P is stabilized in its prefusion conformation by two consecutive proline substitutions at amino acid positions 986 and 987, at the top of the central helix in the S2 subunit.8

    And voila – Reference no. 8 at the bottom of the page is none other than:

    Wrapp D, Wang N, Corbett KS, et al. Cryo-EM structure of the 2019-nCoV spike in the prefusion conformation. Science 2020;367:1260-1263.

    In addition, both the Protocol https://www.nejm.org/doi/suppl/10.1056/NEJMoa2022483/suppl_file/nejmoa2022483_protocol.pdf

    and Supplemental Information https://www.nejm.org/doi/suppl/10.1056/NEJMoa2022483/suppl_file/nejmoa2022483_appendix.pdf  linked at the bottom of the NEJM article show the use of HEK-293.

    Also the article dated August 2020, clearly shows the use of the HEK293 as well for the mRNA-1273 vaccine.

    https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-020-2622-0

    Just a sampling –  page 9 of the Nature article:

  • The Church and Vaccinations

    Vaccination. In a recent conversation, a pastor friend told me that the topic of vaccinations was ripping at the unity of his church. Vaccinations! Parents who refuse to have their children vaccinated and parents who refuse to have their children at church with unvaccinated children have wrangled intensely with each other on Facebook and in the church parking lot. 1 Media propaganda can not alter the deep concerns of religiously devout parents worried about vaccines. 

    A common objection revolves around the role of human fetuses used in the research and manufacturing of vaccines. Sadly, many religious leaders have been purposely misled to believe that abortion tainted vaccines are morally acceptable because “the reasons for having an abortion are not related to vaccine preparation.” (National Catholic Reporter) This faulty assumption that the researchers just picked through the baby parts and chose what they wanted to use for the vaccines has been disproved by recent testimony by Dr. Stanley Plotkin who developed the Rubella vaccine. The fetuses were meticulously chosen and the abortions were performed were done so with the intention of using the human fetuses for the research and development of vaccines. 

    Fetus Chosen Specifically for use in Vaccination Research & Development

    Excerpt of a 5 part series on Christians and Vaccinations that can be found at NewCityTimes.com written by Jordan Wilson (used with permission)

    The cell lines from two dead babies whose parents partnered with the vaccine developers are referred to (with the intent of dehumanizing) as MRC-5 (we’ll call him Jack – he was a boy) and WI-38 (we’ll call her Jill, she was a girl). Who were they? Both were about 3 and a half months when they were tragically killed in the womb. We are told Jill’s parents had her killed because they already had too many children, and Jack’s mother had him killed for “psychiatric” reasons. Neither child was deemed to be unhealthy in any way. Here is an MMR vaccine insert which lists Jill (Wi-38) under the description.

    These candidates are not selected after the abortion but are meticulously screened prior to. Dr. Stanley Plotkin who developed the Rubella vaccine by using Jill’s cells testifies:

    “This fetus was chosen by Dr. Sven Gard, specifically for this purpose. Both parents are known, and unfortunately for the story, they are married to each other, still alive and well, and living in Stockholm, presumably. The abortion was done because they felt they had too many children. There were no familial diseases in the history of either parent, and no history of cancer specifically in the families.”

    Plotkin further testified that in one study alone 76 aborted babies were similarly used in the preparatory work for a single study he participated in and that he performed medical experiments on orphans, the mentally retarded, and babies whose mothers were in prison. 

    Dr Peter McCullough, an Immunologist, wrote the book, The Fetus As Transplant Donor: The Scientific, Social, and Ethical Perspectives, on the methods used in harvesting fetal tissue in Sweden. He writes:

    “They would puncture the sac of a pregnant woman at 14 to 16 weeks, put a clamp on the head of the baby, pull the head down into the neck of the womb, drill a hole into the baby’s head and attach a suction machine to remove the brain cells… At 16 to 21 weeks, they would do prostaglandin abortions where a chemical is injected into the womb causing the woman to go into mini-labor and pass the baby. Fifty percent of the time, the baby would be born alive, but that didn’t stop them. They would simply open up the abdomen of the baby with no anesthesia, and take out the liver and kidneys, etc.”

    Christian Leaders Claim Abortion Tainted Vaccines “Morally Acceptable” based on Faulty Assumptions

    Southern Baptist Church has an article written by Joe Carter – https://erlc.com/resource-library/articles/explainer-vaccines-and-aborted-human-fetal-tissue

    “The key consideration in whether using currently available vaccines is licit or immoral is whether there is material cooperation with the evil act of abortion. If the abortion was conducted in order to harvest tissues that were to be used for the vaccine, then it would clearly be immoral.  But in the case of the vaccines listed above, the abortion was carried out for other reasons and the tissue was acquired post-mortem for the purpose medical research.” 

    Dr. McCullough and Dr. Plotkin’s testimony make it clear : It’s not like these researchers would just passively sort through discarded baby parts. They were actively involved in aborting the babies in such a way as to maximize access to “fresh” tissue. 

    Catholic Religious Leaders “wash their hands of guilt” and encourage vaccination for ‘common good’

    The National Catholic Bioethics Center : “Upon use, one should register a complaint with the manufacturer of the products as an acceptable form of conscientious objection,” the statement says. “This signals opposition to the wider, morally reprehensible practice of using the unborn as little more than research material for science.”

    “There is no moral obligation to register such a complaint in order to use these vaccines,” it says, adding that “it should be obvious that vaccine use in these cases does not contribute directly to the practice of abortion since the reasons for having an abortion are not related to vaccine preparation.”

    The above statement the Catholic leaders completely ignore the proof that abortions were performed in a manner to specifically use the innocent unborn as spare parts for the intent purpose of the research and manufacturing vaccination.  

    Mormon Press cites Church Pro-Vaccination stance

    1985 statement:

    “Today, with the use of immunizations, these diseases are becoming more and more uncommon. In fact, they are so uncommon that many parents have become lax about immunizing their children. Some feel that there is no need; others fear adverse side effects. But parents have an obligation to protect their families through immunization.”

    A church manual from 2000: 

    “We can protect ourselves and our families from some diseases by getting immunizations. For some diseases we need only one immunization, but for other diseases we may need several immunizations at certain time intervals.”

    http://www.mormonpress.com/mormon_vaccination

    One member of the Church of Christ of Latter Day Saints sent this letter to the President: 

    Church statements are so strong that many members of the Church will likely arrive at the facile conclusion that God is pro-vaccine and choosing not to vaccinate is in violation of God’s will. 2

    It is comments such as those found in the Mormon Press that have lead some members to believe that vaccination is actually Church doctrine. Recently Senator Fred Martin an  LDS member publicly made the false claim that the doctrine of the Church is vaccination. Senator Martin is an advocate for vaccination and prides himself on his accomplishments ‘increasing vaccinations’ while denying parents clear disclosure as evidenced by the bills promoting such, were ultimately stopped by Martin. He sits on the Immunization Board under the Executive Department in addition to Chairing the Legislative Health Committee. He believes his ‘faith’ supports vaccinations.

    He quickly accused members of the faith as ‘attacking him’ when they were quick to point out the misinformation being promoted by the Senator.  “Vaccination is not a doctrine of the Church. Agency is.” he was told.

    (Below is a screen shot of his conversation he started on the Health Freedom Idaho Facebook Page.) 

    Deeply Personal Topic Creates Strife in Churches

    It’s an issue that literally breaks up families. It divides communities, and creates suspicion, whispering, and strife in churches. Produces enemies in neighborhoods and schools. It generates situations (like this year in Rockland County, NY) where the civil magistrate effectively denies Lord’s day communion of the saints from those who will not vaccinate by banning them from “places of worship.” Why? The measles. Where the death toll is a staggering zero people. 

    It’s an issue that causes people to leave their church, pick up their whole life and move to another county or state. It’s a deeply personal issue and emotions are at the forefront. – JORDAN WILSON 

    A great many of us who are Christians have been asking this question in regard to vaccine injury and corruption for years. We read the very errant missives put out by often well meaning, professing Christians, pastors, elders and physicians that seemed to have never looked beyond the CDC’s home page on vaccine safety and efficacy, and give up hope that our voices, and our cries for our children, will ever be heard in what should be our spiritual homes. – Ginger Taylor 

    EXCELLENT READING for CHRISTIANS:

    The Gospel Coalition & Vaccines: A Response to Joe Carter

    Part 1: Vaccines & Aborted Babies: Should Christians be Concerned?

    Part 2: Are Vaccines What Saved Us from Epidemics of Infectious Disease?

    Part 3: Is the US Vaccination Program Safe?

    Part 4: What About Herd Immunity?

    Part 5: Are Vaccine Skeptics Conspiracy Theorists?

    RELIGIOUS ORGANIZATIONS STANCE ON VACCINATIONS: 

    according to Vanderbilt these organizations support vaccination. 

    The following Christian denominations have no theological objection to vaccination:

    • Roman Catholicism
    • The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints (Mormon)* official doctrine promotes agency (personal choice)
    • Congregational
    • Episcopalian
    • Jehovah’s Witness – Note: This denomination originally denounced vaccination, but revised this doctrine in 1952. An article in a recent issue of the church’s newsletter promotes vaccination to avoid infectious diseases.

     The following denominations do have a theological objection to vaccination:

    • Dutch Reformed Congregations – This denomination has a tradition of declining immunizations. Some members decline vaccination on the basis that it interferes with divine providence. However, others within the faith accept immunization as a gift from God to be used with gratitude.
    • Faith healing denominations including:
      • Faith Tabernacle
      • Church of the First Born
      • Faith Assembly
      • End Time Ministries
    • Church of Christ, Scientist –  One of the basic teachings of this denomination is that disease can be cured or prevented by focused prayer and members will often request exemptions when available. However, there are not strict rules against vaccination and members can receive required vaccinations.

    FURTHER RESOURCES

    Intentionally Mislead Religious Leaders

    Some health departments have sent media packages (written by a man who works for vaccine manufacturer Merck) to the religious leaders to ‘encourage’ parishioner’s compliance in the state vaccination program. 

    Articles from Religious Coalitions/Organizations 

    The Gospel Coalition https://www.thegospelcoalition.org/article/what-christians-should-know-vaccines/ 

    National Catholic Reporter https://www.ncronline.org/news/parish/catholics-urged-remember-common-good-vaccine-debate

    Focus on the Family http://media.focusonthefamily.com/topicinfo/vaccine_safety.pdf

    OBJECTION TO VACCINATION – Letters to Leaders

    https://www.runningthecountry.com/the-mormon-church-and-vaccines-a-letter-to-the-first-presidency/#.XUdcPuhKiUk

    https://www.livingwhole.org/god-does-not-support-vaccines/

  • Answers That Cannot Be Questioned

    We are in a era where medical science no longer allows raise questions about the liability-free medical product mandated by law. Those ‘brave souls’ who venture out to question the validity of the “the science is settled” Public Health slogans risk having reputations shredded.  In this recent blog post Scottish doctor, author and self proclaimed skeptic took a ‘brave’ step to bring up legitimate scientific questions against vaccination in two separate articles. 

    excerpt from his article: My feeling about the vaccine debate

    It is clear that, in the medical profession, there is an unquestioned faith in vaccination. That is, all vaccinations, for all diseases, everywhere – for everyone. Anyone who dares to hint that, ahem, there could be some negative issues associated with vaccination is subjected to withering contempt. ‘You will be responsible for killing millions of children.’ You don’t understand science.’ And suchlike.

    When it comes to the science, it does amuse me that vaccination began before anyone understood any of the science – of anything to do with microbes and the immune system. It all began, so it is recorded, with the observation that milkmaids were much less likely to get smallpox.

    excerpt from the more recent article A second look at vaccinations:

    I have to say that I thought long and hard about blogging on vaccination. It is the most brutal area for discussion that I have ever seen, and a reputation shredder. If you even dare to hint that there may just be the slightest issue with any vaccine, people come down upon you like a ton of bricks.

    However, as we move towards a world where it seems that all Governments around the world are going to pass laws mandating vaccination for everyone, and people are fined, or lose their jobs, for speaking out, or refusing to be vaccinated, then I feel that some attempt to discuss the area is essential.

    Because, once something becomes mandatory, and any research into possible harms moves strictly off limits, we really need to be absolutely one hundred per-cent certain that there is no possibility that we may be doing harm. Or, that we are reducing any potential harm to the lowest level possible.

    Read the article in full by Dr. Malcom Kendrick A second look at vaccination – answers that cannot be questioned

  • Vaccines are Safe and Effective except…

    When you hear “vaccines are safe and effective” and “the science is settled” — remember those are Public Health slogans meant to create compliance. Scratch the surface of the actual science and you learn fascinating things — such as the fact that researchers are only now just beginning to research the cell lines used to make vaccines to investigate the tumorigenic (cancer-causing) retroviruses they often carry.

    https://www.fda.gov/vaccines-blood-biologics/biologics-research-projects/investigating-viruses-cells-used-make-vaccines-and-evaluating-potential-threat-posed-transmission

    What percentage of the rodents were getting tumors and how many of those rodents developed cancer causing tumors. Either way, Wow! 

    “These include tumorigenic cells such as MDCK and CHO cells (for influenza virus vaccines), 293 and PER.C6 cells (for adenovirus-vectored HIV-1 and other vaccines), and tumor-derived cells such as HeLa cells (for HIV-1 vaccines).”

    The FDA article was published in February 2018. However, Dr Judy Mikovits discovered retro viruses in vaccines sometime ago and was jailed for refusing to destroy the data. 

    VACCINES, RETROVIRUSES, DNA, AND THE DISCOVERY THAT DESTROYED JUDY MIKOVITS’ CAREER

    Dr. Mikovits will be presenting at the 2nd Annual Natural Health Symposium in Boise, Idaho. Tickets on Sale Now!

     

    RESOURCES:

    Further Reading:
    Sources: