Tag: vaccine-safety

  • Vaccine Science, Safety and Assumptions with Del Bigtree

    Del Bigtree produces one of the fastest-growing programs in the natural health arena. Why are people so fascinated with this controversial topic of vaccine safety? Perhaps its because mainstream media makes him out to be a monster or a liar so curiosity draws people in. Quite possibly it could it be because he is one of the only programs that ask the tough questions of the pharmaceutical industry and seeks to find the answers to the questions as they refuse to respond. Many parents have seen the damage caused by vaccines and been dismissed. Now people are beginning to realize the impact of vaccines on the health of their children and themselves and seeing highly educated individuals sharing their knowledge on the topic of these liability-free medical products.

    https://youtu.be/56o6Nlc7YCI
    • Learn why Hirewire Radio and Icandecide.org are striking such a chord with the people, who are driven by both curiosity and concern
    • Why Bigtree believes that what’s the heart of the state vaccine mandate laws is really about the right to sovereignty or body autonomy. Do we have the right to own our bodies? Or are we simply the property of the United States government?
    • Discover how the winning lawsuits against both US government agencies Health and Human Services and National Institute of Health prove that there is no science showing vaccines are safe and effective.
    • Learn how there is not really an anti-vaxxer movement it is in fact, driven by those who believed in the vaccine program until it destroyed the life of someone they love or themselves.

    Informed Consent Action Network challenged Health and Human Services with lawsuits to show the safety studies that measure the way we test the vaccines. Every other drug made requires a trial of one group get the drug the other groups it’s a sugar pill or saline injection if the product is injectable. They have finally admitted that they never ever tested any of the childhood vaccines on our schedule compared them to a placebo group, which means they have no scientific way to state unequivocally that vaccines are safe.  That is a lie,  there is no science behind that. That is a belief,  an assumption and I think its failing.

    Del Bigtree

    RESOURCES:

    Lack of Safety Testing experts from Icandecide.org

    Plotkin Godfather of Vaccines Experimented on Orphans and Disabled

    Del Bigtree Irrefutable Argument Against Vaccine Safety Claims

    Vaccine Adverse Reaction Automated Tracking

  • Flu Vaccine Fails 99% in New Cochrane Review

    On February 1, 2018, the independent Cochrane group released its latest findings on the flu vaccine showing flu vaccine fails 99% of the time. Cochrane is a global independent network of researchers in more than 130 countries who strive to produce credible, accessible health information that is free from commercial sponsorship and other conflicts of interest. They do not take Big Pharma money. Therefore, their studies deserve attention when they are released.

    (1) The scientists studied randomized, controlled trials comparing the flu vaccine with placebo or no intervention. They included 52 clinical trials of over 80,000 people assessing the safety and effectiveness of flu vaccines in healthy adults. The studies were conducted between 1969 and 2009.

    The authors found that flu vaccines probably reduced influenzas in healthy adults from 2.3% without vaccination to 0.9% with.

    That means that the difference between the vaccinated and the unvaccinated is 1.4% or 0.014. Therefore, 71 people would need to be treated with the flu vaccine to prevent one case (1/1.4%). In other words, the flu vaccine did nothing for 70 out of 71 who received it. That means this study found the flu vaccine failed 99% (71/72).

    There was more bad news for the flu vaccine in this study. The flu vaccine is touted as decreasing the risk of hospitalizations from the flu. I’m not sure how that happens since the vaccine has never been shown to be very effective against preventing the flu. In this study they found the risk of hospitalization in those that received the flu vaccine declined from 14.7% to 14.1%. That is a 0.6% decline. That means the flu vaccine fails over 99% (165/166) in preventing hospitalizations. Furthermore, the independent researchers found the flu vaccine “…may lead to little or no small reduction in days off work.” To make matter worse, the flu vaccine was shown to cause an increase in fever from 1.5% to 2.3%. Oy vey.

    Why would anyone get a flu vaccine when it fails 99% who receive it?

    Why would any physician prescribe a therapy, which is associated with serious adverse effects, that fails 99% who receive it?

    Why are health care workers forced to receive a flu vaccine when it is consistently shown to fail nearly 99% who get them? And, there is not a single well-done study showing that vaccinating health care workers with the flu vaccine protects against the spread of flu.

    Folks, the flu vaccine is a disaster. I can understand why President Trump does not get the flu shot. I cannot understand why anyone would allow themselves to be injected with a failed flu vaccine.

    (1) Cochrane Database Syst. Rev. 2018. Feb. 1,2:CD001269

    David Brownstein, M.D. Dr B’s Holistic Medicine, Vaccine Issues

    https://www.cochranelibrary.com/cdsr/table-of-contents/2018/2

    Cochrane is a global independent network of researchers in more than 130 countries who strive to produce credible, accessible health information that is free from commercial sponsorship and other conflicts of illness. They do not take Big Pharma money. Therefore, their studies deserve attention when they are released.

  • VACCINE SAFETY Part 3: The 100 fold increase of vaccine adverse reactions when reporting was automated

    Vaccine reactions are known and hardly reported. When a system was developed to automatically report adverse reactions to vaccines it proved that they occur in rates greater than 1 in a million (as claimed by the CDC). Why would an organization that claims to be dedicated to the protection of health eliminate the opportunity to identify vaccines that cause harm to a large portion of the population?

    ICAN spent months researching the state of vaccine safety in the United States. The shocking result of this effort was presented to the heads of the National Institutes of Health with Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. in May of 2017.

    The information contained in that presentation has been distilled into an easy to read, thorough white paper that goes through many of the shortcomings and failures of the vaccine safety program. This is PART III of that paper.  A U.S. House Report similarly stated: “Former FDA Commissioner David A. Kessler has estimated that VAERS reports currently represent only a fraction of the serious adverse events.”31 X

    VAERS (the U.S. vaccine adverse event reporting system) is that it is a passive reporting system, relying on voluntary, rather than mandatory, reporting. Assuming VAERS captures 1 percent of adverse events (which is more than is estimated),
    then the number of adverse events reported to VAERS in 2016 would reflect for that year
    5,911,700 adverse events,
    43,200 deaths
    109,100 permanent disabilities
    413,200 hospitalizations
    and 1,028,400 emergency room visits related to vaccines.

    Capturing “fewer than 1% of vaccine adverse events” thirty years after the passage of the 1986 Act is unacceptable – and potentially deadly.
    Did you know an automated system was developed and the CDC refused to implement it?

    Numerous reviews of VAERS have found that only a tiny fraction of vaccine adverse events are reported. For example, an HHS-funded review of vaccine adverse events over a three-year period by Harvard Medical School involving 715,000 patients found that “fewer than 1% of vaccine adverse events are reported.”30 

    It would be far better if adverse events reports were automatically created and submitted to VAERS to avoid the issue of under-reporting. Automated reporting would provide invaluable information that could clarify which vaccines might cause harm and to whom, potentially allowing us to avoid these injuries and deaths. The idea of automating adverse event reporting to VAERS is not new or even difficult to achieve.32  

    The Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, an agency within HHS, sought to do exactly that in 2007 when it provided an approximately $1 million grant to automate VAERS reporting at Harvard Pilgrim Health Care.33  The result was the successful automation of adverse event reports at Harvard Pilgrim: Preliminary data were collected from June 2006 through October 2009 on 715,000 patients, and 1.4 million doses (of 45 different vaccines) were given to 376,452 individuals. Of these doses, 35,570 possible reactions … were identified.34 These results should have been startling to HHS since they show that over only a three-year period, there were 35,570 reportable reactions in just 376,452 vaccine recipients. Given HHS’s statutory mandate to assure safer vaccines, it should have rushed forward with automating VAERS reporting. However, this is not what happened.

    After automating adverse event reports at Harvard Pilgrim, the developers of this system asked the CDC to take the final step of linking VAERS with the Harvard Pilgrim system so that these reports could be automatically transmitted into VAERS. Instead, the CDC refused to cooperate.

    As the Harvard grant recipients explained: Unfortunately, there was never an opportunity to perform system performance assessments because the necessary CDC contacts were no longer available and the CDC consultants responsible for receiving data were no longer responsive to our multiple requests to proceed with testing and evaluation.35

    After three years and spending $1 million of taxpayers’ money, the CDC refused to even communicate with the HHS’ Harvard Medical School grant recipients. While HHS generally strongly supports automating public health surveillance systems, when it comes to vaccine safety, the CDC has only supported projects that would limit VAERS to passive surveillance.36  

    Automation would improve safety and address many of the long-standing issues and limitations raised by CDC regarding VAERS.37

    Find out more at Vaccine Safety Paper fromIcandecide.com 

    Only 1% of vaccine injury is reported to VAERS https://healthit.ahrq.gov/sites/default/files/docs/publication/r18hs017045-lazarus-final-report-2011.pdf

  • VACCINE SAFETY Part 1: Responsibility for Vaccine Safety lies SQUARELY On the Shoulders of US Department of Health and Human Services

    Unlike nearly every other company in America, pharmaceutical companies have almost no liability for injuries caused by their vaccine products.

    By granting immunity from actual or potential liability from injuries caused by vaccines, Congress eliminated the market forces that are generally relied upon to assure the safety of all other products. As the 1986 Act expressly provides: “No person may bring a civil action … against a vaccine administrator or manufacturer in a State or Federal court for damages arising from a vaccine-related injury or death.” Every pediatric vaccine recommended by the CDC creates for its manufacturer a liability-free captive market of 78 million children with guaranteed payment. So, who is there making sure vaccines are SAFE since manufacturers have no financial incentive do to so.

    ICANspent months researching the state of vaccine safety in the United States. The shocking result of this effort was presented to the heads of the National Institutes of Health with Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. in May of 2017.

    The information contained in that presentation has been distilled into an easy to read, thorough white paper that goes through many of the shortcomings and failures of the vaccine safety program. This is PART 2 of that paper.

    In 2016, the IOM formally changed its name to the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. Explained by the Institute of Medicine (IOM) 1, by 1986, the “litigation costs associated with claims of damage from vaccines had forced several companies to end their vaccine research and development programs as well as to stop producing already licensed vaccines.”2

    Instead of letting market forces compel vaccine makers to create safer vaccines, Congress granted pharmaceutical companies, financial immunity from injuries caused by vaccines recommended by the CDC. 3 Congress did so by passing the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act (the 1986 Act). 4

    By granting immunity from actual or potential liability from injuries caused by vaccines, Congress eliminated the market forces that are generally relied upon to assure the safety of all other products.

    As the 1986 Act expressly provides: “No person may bring a civil action… against a vaccine administrator or manufacturer in a State or Federal court for damages arising from a vaccine-related injury or death.”5

    The 1986 Act even shields vaccine makers from liability where it is clear and unmistakable that the vaccine in question could have been designed safer. 6As recently explained in a U.S. Supreme Court opinion: [N]o one—neither the FDA nor any other federal agency, nor state and federal juries—ensures that vaccine manufacturers adequately take account of scientific and technological advancements. This concern is especially acute with respect to vaccines that have already released and marketed to the public. Manufacturers… Will often have little or no incentive to improve the designs of vaccines that are already generating significant profit margins.7

    Recognizing that the 1986 Act eliminated the incentive for vaccine makers to assure the safety of their vaccine products, the 1986 Act explicitly places this responsibility in the hands of the United States Department of Health & Human Services (HHS).8  

    As provided in the 1986 Act, HHS is responsible for “research … to prevent adverse reactions to vaccines,” “develop[ing] the techniques needed to produce safe … vaccines,” “safety … testing of vaccines,” “monitoring … adverse effects of vaccines,” and “shall make or assure improvements in … the licensing, manufacturing, processing, testing, labeling, warning, use instructions, distribution, storage, administration, field surveillance, adverse reaction reporting, … and research on vaccines in order to reduce the risks of adverse reactions to vaccines.”9

    Since passage of the 1986 Act, the number of required pediatric vaccines has grown rapidly. In 1983, the CDC’s childhood vaccine schedule included 11 injections of 4 vaccines.10

    As of 2017, the CDC’s childhood vaccine schedule includes 56 injections of 30 different vaccines. It is only when the CDC adds a vaccine to its recommended vaccine schedule that the manufacturer is granted immunity from liability for vaccine injuries.

    And due to a federal funding scheme, CDC recommended vaccines are then made compulsory to American children under state laws and subsidized by the Federal government for children unable to afford the vaccine.13

    The end result is that under the 1986 Act, every pediatric vaccine recommended by the CDC creates for its manufacturer a liability-free captive market of 78 million children with guaranteed payment. This incentive structure is unequal in the marketplace and eliminates the normal market forces driving product safety. Hence the 1986 Act’s transferred essentially all responsibility for vaccine safety from the pharmaceutical companies to HHS.

    Read this important letter putting Health and Human Services on notice for failing to conduct proper science to demonstrate vaccine safety. “ICAN lays out the provisions of the (1986 Act) that legally require HHS to conduct science that reduces the risk of all vaccine injury. Failure to do so could result in legal action against HHS on behalf of the American public.”
    http://www.icandecide.com/white-papers/ICAN-HHS-Notice.pdf

    READ MORE ABOUT VACCINE SAFETY IN OUR SERIES  PART 1  | PART 2 | PART 3

    2 https://www.nap.edu/read/2138/chapter/2#2
    3 42 U.S.C. § 300aa-1 et seq.
    4 Ibid.
    5 42 U.S.C. § 300aa-11
    6 Bruesewitz v. Wyeth LLC, 562 U.S. 223 (2011)
    7 Ibid.
    8 42 U.S.C. § 300aa-2; 42 U.S.C. § 300aa-27
    9 Ibid.
    10 https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/schedules/images/schedule 1983s.jpg
    11 https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/schedules/hcp/imz/child-adol escent.html (note that the influenza vaccine is different every year)
    12 The rapid growth of CDC’s vaccine schedule is excepted to accelerate since there were 271 new vaccines under development in 2013 and far more currently under development. http://www.phrma.org/press-release/medicines-in-developme nt-vaccines (listing 2,300 trials in search for “vaccines” between 2013 and 2017)
    13 See Section IV below.
    14 https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/drugsatfda_docs/label/2012/103795s5503lbl.pdf
    15 https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/drugsatfda_docs/label/2009/020702s056lbl.pdf
    16 https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/drugsatfda_docs/label/2017/103000s5302lbl.pdf

  • VACCINE SAFETY Part 2: failure of pre licensing safety testing

    HHS, through the FDA, licenses all vaccines used by the American public. All non-vaccine drugs licensed by the FDA undergo long-term multi-year doubleblind safety studies during which the rate of adverse reactions in the group receiving the drug under review is compared to the rate of adverse reactions in a group receiving an inert placebo, such as a sugar pill or saline injection.

    For example:

    • Enbrel’s pre-licensure trials followed subjects up to 80 months and controls received a saline injection.14
    • Lipitor’s pre-licensure trials lasted a median of 4.8 years and controls received a sugar pill.15
    • Botox’s pre-licensure trials lasted a median of 51 weeks and controls received a saline injection.16

    And even with these long-term studies, drugs are still often recalled.

    While most drugs, like the ones above, are given to sick adults, pediatric vaccines are typically given universally to babies and toddlers. And while pharmaceutical companies remain liable for injuries caused by their non-vaccine drugs, as discussed above, they have no liability for injuries caused by their vaccines.

    One would therefore expect that pre-licensure safety testing for vaccines would be more rigorous than that conducted for drugs.

    Unfortunately, unlike all non-vaccine drugs licensed by the FDA, vaccines are not required to undergo long-term double-blind inert-placebo controlled trials to assess safety. In fact, not a single one of the clinical trials for vaccines given to babies and toddlers had a control group receiving an inert placebo.

    Further, most pediatric vaccines currently on the market have been approved based on studies with inadequate follow-up periods of only a few days or weeks.

    For example, there are two Hepatitis B vaccines licensed for one day old babies in the United States – one manufactured by Merck and the other by GlaxoSmithKline. Merck’s Hepatitis B vaccine was licensed by the FDA after trials which solicited adverse reactions for only five days after vaccination.17 

    Similarly, GlaxoSmithKline’s Hepatitis B vaccine was licensed by the FDA after trials which solicited adverse reactions for only four days after vaccination.18 

    Follow-up periods of 4 or 5 days are not nearly long enough to detect possible adverse effects such as autoimmune or neurological disorders, seizures, or death. Worse is that since neither of these clinical trials used a control group, it was impossible to scientifically determine if any adverse reaction in the limited four or five day safety review period was even caused by the Hepatitis B vaccine being evaluated.

    Similarly, the HiB vaccines manufactured by Merck and GlaxoSmithKline were licensed by the FDA based on trials in which adverse reactions were monitored for only three days and four days, respectively, after vaccination.19

    The only stand-alone polio vaccine in the United States was licensed after a mere 48-hour follow-up period. 20

    Even more amazing is that unlike every drug licensed by the FDA, the control groups in these vaccine trials did not receive an inert placebo. 21

    Rather, the control group was given one or more previously licensed vaccines as the “placebo.”22

    This means each new vaccine need only be roughly as safe as one (or in some cases numerous) previously licensed vaccines. Such flawed and unscientific study designs cannot establish the actual safety profile of any vaccine. The real adverse event rate for a vaccine can only be determined by comparing subjects receiving the vaccine with those receiving an inert placebo.

    Yet, this study design, required for every drug, is never required before or after licensing a vaccine. It is unacceptable that the FDA licensing process for vaccines fails to assess the safety profile of each vaccine. It is also unacceptable that the FDA does not require the use of inert placebo controls to assure the integrity of even the minimal safety review conducted. As HHS’s own paid experts, the IOM, explains: “Because [vaccine] trials are primarily … for determination of efficacy, conclusions about vaccine safety derived from these trials are limited.”23

    READ MORE ABOUT VACCINE SAFETY IN OUR SERIES  PART 1  | PART 2 | PART 3

    http://icandecide.com/white-papers/VaccineSafety-Version-1.0-October-2-2017.pdf

    12 The rapid growth of CDC’s vaccine schedule is expected to accelerate since there were 271 new vaccines under development in 2013 and far more currently under development. http://www.phrma.org/press-release/medicines-in-developme nt-vaccines (listing 2,300 trials in search for “vaccines” between 2013 and 2017)
    13 See Section IV below.
    14 https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/drugsatfda_docs/label/2012/103795s5503lbl.pdf
    15 https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/drugsatfda_docs/label/2009/020702s056lbl.pdf

    16 https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/drugsatfda_docs/label/2017/103000s5302lbl.pdf

    17 https://www.fda.gov/downloads/BiologicsBloodVaccines/Vaccines/ApprovedProducts/UCM110114.pdf 

    18 https://www.fda.gov/downloads/BiologicsBloodVaccines/Vaccines/ApprovedProducts/UCM224503.pdf 

    19 https://www.fda.gov/downloads/BiologicsBloodVaccines/Vaccines/ApprovedProducts/UCM253652.pdf

    https://www.fda.gov/downloads/BiologicsBloodVaccines/Vaccines/ApprovedProducts/UCM179530.pdf 

    20 https://www.fda.gov/downloads/BiologicsBloodVaccines/Vaccines/ApprovedProducts/UCM133479.pdf

    21 Ibid. (prior two footnotes)
    22 Ibid.

    UPDATE: HHS Never Reviewed A Single Vaccine Study in the 32 Years Charged with Monitoring Vaccine Safety

  • New CDC Guidelines: 5 Year-Old Can Receive up to 19 Vaccinations in One Month

    CDC has launched a vaccine ‘catch-up schedule’ that has NOT been tested for safety, requiring a five year old to receive 19 vaccines in one month. This includes 6 doses of aluminum-containing injections! Neither manufacturers, nor the CDC has tested for safety to determine the immediate or long-term risk of neurological or immunological damage.  

    On November 2, 2017, Neil Z. Miller made an online announcement that was guaranteed to shock thousands of parents worldwide.

    In a post, written on the popular social media platform Facebook, Miller exposed that the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) had recently hatched a plan to ensure that ALL children were up to date with their scheduled vaccinations, whether they were vaccinated or unvaccinated . He revealed that the CDC had launched a catch-up program which could cause an unvaccinated 5-year-old to receive as many as 19 vaccinations in one month.

    He wrote that:

    “The CDC has just launched a program that will calculate a catch-up schedule for children who were not vaccinated on schedule. A 5-year-old child who was not previously vaccinated would be required to receive 19 vaccines in one month, including 6 doses of aluminum-containing injections! This catch-up schedule was NOT tested for safety to determine the immediate or long-term risk of neurological or immunological damage.” (own emphasis)

    Following the links provided by Miller, it appears that the CDC table of vaccinations required in their catch-up program had been approved by the following organizations:

    Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices – ( www.cdc.gov/vaccines/acip)

    American Academy of Pediatrics – ( www.aap.org)

     American Academy of Family Physicians – ( www.aafp.org)

     American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists – ( www.acog.org)

    See tables here.

    Combining Childhood Vaccinations in One Visit is Potentially Life-Threatening

    In September 2016, Miller and his co-author Goldman published a paper titled Combining Childhood Vaccines at One Visit Is Not Safe.

    Using data taken from the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) website, Miller was able to prove that the more vaccines a child received at any given time, the more likely an adverse reaction could occur.

    They wrote that:

     “… Of the 38,801 VAERS reports that we analyzed, 969 infants received two vaccine doses prior to the adverse event and 107 of those infants were hospitalized: a hospitalization rate of 11%. Of 1,959 infants who received three vaccine doses prior to the adverse event, 243 of them required hospitalization: 12.4%. For four doses, 561 of 3,909 infants were hospitalized: 14.4%.

    Notice the emerging pattern: Infants who had an adverse event reported to VAERS were more likely to require hospitalization when they received three vaccine doses instead of two, or four vaccine doses instead of three.”

    The researchers continued:

    “… Of 10,114 infants who received five vaccine doses prior to the adverse event, 1,463 of them required hospitalization: 14.5%. For six doses, 1,365 of 8,454 infants were hospitalized: 16.1%. For seven doses, 1,051 of 5,489 infants were hospitalized: 19.1%. And for eight doses, 661 of 2,817 infants were hospitalized: 23.5%. The hospitalization rate increased linearly from 11.0% for two doses to 23.5% for eight doses.”

    In other words, the more vaccines that an infant received, the more likely they were to suffer an adverse reaction.

    Miller and Goldman explained that:

    “Of the 38,801 VAERS reports that we analyzed, 11,927 infants received one, two, three, or four vaccine doses prior to having an adverse event, and 423 of those infants died: a mortality rate of 3.6%. The remaining 26,874 infants received five, six, seven, or eight vaccine doses prior to the adverse event and 1,458 of them died: 5.4%.

    The mortality rate for infants who received five to eight vaccine doses (5.4%) is significantly higher than the mortality rate for infants who received one to four doses (3.6%), with a rate ratio(RR) of 1.5 (95% CI, 1.4-1.7).

    Of infants reported to VAERS, those who had received more vaccines had a statistically significant 50% higher mortality rate compared with those who had received fewer.”

    To read more on Miller’s paper, see my article: New Study Warns of the Dangers of Multiple Vaccinations.

    Once again the CDC is recommending vaccines in a schedule for our children without safety testing. Health Freedom Idaho joined 55 organizations respectfully requesting the US Department of Health and Human Services to provide confirmation that certain obligations regarding vaccine safety required under the 1986 Act have been fulfilled or will forthwith be fulfilled. Read the entire notice at HHS Vaccine Safety Responsibilities and Notice Pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 300aa-31

  • Our kids vaccines contaminated with LEAD

    Our kids vaccines contaminated with LEAD

    ITALIAN SCIENTISTS FIND UNEXPECTED CONTAMINANTS IN ALL PEDIATRIC VACCINES, INCLUDING LEAD, STAINLESS STEEL, TUNGSTEN, IRON, AND CHROMIUM

    New Quality-Control Investigations on Vaccines: Micro- and Nanocontamination 

    International Journal of Vaccines and Vaccination, January 2017, Dr. Antonietta M. Gatti, Stefano Montanari

    Summary: Scientists found contaminants in all vaccines that are not listed on the label of the vaccines. “The analyses carried out show that in all samples checked vaccines contain non bio-compatible and bio-persistent foreign bodies which are not declared by the Producers, against which the body reacts in any case. This new investigation represents a new quality control that can be adopted to assess the safety of a vaccine. Our hypothesis is that this contamination is unintentional, since it is probably due to polluted components or procedures of industrial processes (e.g. filtrations) used to produce vaccines, not investigated and not detected by the Producers. If our hypothesis is actually the case, a close inspection of the working places and the full knowledge of the whole procedure of vaccine preparation would probably allow to eliminate the problem.”

    Vaccine Safety a Concern

    Vaccine safety appears to be a concern of new US President Donald Trump. Early in his presidency he tapped Robert Kennedy Jr to head up a vaccine safety commission. Media decried that thought.
    Parents and doctors alike ask what harm could come from independent studies on the safety of our children’s vaccines?
    Why WOULDN’T anyone want to make sure what we are injecting into their developing bodies is safe?

    Feb 14, 2017 in WASHINGTON, D.C. — A new organization launched calling themselves “Vaccine Safety Commission”, a nonprofit organization that was formed by “concerned scientists, doctors, journalists, and parents.” For now, the group has chosen to remain anonymous, but I certainly hope that changes soon. The group has no formal affiliation to either Robert F. Kennedy or President Trump, but wholeheartedly endorses the formation of a Vaccine Safety Commission, and claims to be actively seeking additional members.

    • New nonprofit organization launched today, Vaccine Safety Commission
    • They list 50 studies the AAP “forgot” to send President Trump
    • Scientists, Doctors, and Journalists supporting the formation of a true, independent commission to study vaccine safety

    RESOURCES:

    https://medium.com/@jbhandley/vaccine-safety-commission-50-studies-the-aap-failed-to-send-president-trump-bdc03a4ca8c9

  • Fast Tracked EBOLA VACCINE Contaminated with Cancer Causing Monkey Cells

    Fast Tracked EBOLA VACCINE Contaminated with Cancer Causing Monkey Cells

    The new experimental Ebola vaccine being fast-tracked for mass production was developed using a continuous cell line (Vero) culture derived from the stockpile remains of an African Green Monkey.(1963).

    ‘The Vero 1008 C (E6) cell line was originally obtained from ATCC (Maryland, USA) and cultured in Gibco® Dulbelcco’s modified Eaggle’s medium (DMEM) with GlutaMAX™, high glucose and HEPES supplemented with 10% fetal bovine serum (FBS, Euro-Clone), 1% Gibco® penicillin/streptomycin solution (5,000 U/mL) and 1x Gibco® MEM non-essential amino acids solution (100x) at 37°C, 5%CO2.’

    Based on my extensive research into the original Polio vaccine, all related Vero cell lines are cross-contaminated with Simian Virus 40. This new vaccine will unleash a torrent of spin-off rarified cancer strains into the African population.

    ‘Vero cells are sensitive to infection with SV-40, SV-5, measles, arboviruses, reoviruses, rubella, simian adenoviruses, polioviruses, influenza viruses, parainfluenza viruses, respiratory syncytial viruses, vaccinia, and others.’

    read more about SV-40, Ebola, Yellow Fever and Polio

  • FLU SHOT IS NOT Mercury-Free

    FLU SHOT IS NOT Mercury-Free

    2015/2016 Flu Vaccine Contains thimerosal a mercury derivative

    Flu Vaccine Mercury thimerosal

    THIMEROSAL/MERCURY

    The Influenza Vaccine clearly shows the vaccine contains Thimerosal a neurotoxin.
    Thimerosal, which is approximately 50% mercury by weight, has been one of the most widely used preservatives in vaccines.
    Tests conducted via ICP-MS document mercury in the Flulaval vaccine at a shocking 51 parts per million.
     50,000 ppb Mercury = Current “preservative” level mercury in multi-dose flu (94% of supply).
    WHAT EFFECTIVE DOES MECURY HAVE ON YOUR BODY?
    0.5 parts per billion (ppb) mercury = Kills human neuroblastoma cells
    (Parran et al., Toxicol Sci 2005; 86: 132-140).
    2 ppb mercury = U.S. EPA limit for drinking water http://www.epa.gov/safewater/contaminants/index.html#mcls
    20 ppb mercury = Neurite membrane structure destroyed (Leong et al., Neuroreport 2001; 12: 733-37).
    200 ppb mercury = level in liquid the EPA classifies as hazardous waste. http://www.epa.gov/epaoswer/hazwaste/mercury/regs.htm...
    25,000 ppb mercury = Concentration of mercury in the Hepatitis B vaccine, administered at birth in the U.S., from 1990-2001.
    50,000 ppb Mercury = Concentration of mercury in multi-dose DTaP and Haemophilus B vaccine vials, administered 4 times each in the 1990’s to children at 2, 4, 6, 12 and 18 months of age.
    Current “preservative” level mercury in multi-dose flu (94% of supply), meningococcal and tetanus (7 and older) vaccines.
    By injecting mercury instead of ingesting it, you are essentially by-passing your inner filtration systems.  All of the mercury in a vaccine enters the blood stream, which leads straight to the brain.  Remember that toxic amounts of mercury is considered anything over 200 ppb, and the amount of mercury in a “thimerosal-free” flu vaccine is 300 to 600 ppb – the vaccine most commonly used contains 50,000 ppb.  When you ingest mercury, the amount that reaches your blood stream is much less than the actual amount you consumed.  When you vaccinate, the entire amount of mercury reaches your blood stream.
    mercury in a flu shot

    THE FLU SHOT NOT SAFE.  IT IS THE MOST DANGEROUS VACCINE. 

    VAERS reporting reflects FLU VACCINE caused the most damage

    As of April 2016, 126,884 adverse reactions/events were reported for the flu shot to the Vaccine Adverse Events Reporting System and it has the been the most compensated for vaccine injury. Vaccine manufacturer’s and providers administering vaccinations are exempt from lawsuit in the case of injury or death. Possible reactions include: Paralysis, severe allergic reaction,vomiting, chronic exhaustion, facial palsy, blood and lymphatic system disorders,convulsions and more.
    Picture 

    DOJ Quarterly Vaccine Injury Compensation Information Department of Justice numbers reported regarding quarterly vaccine injury information reveals that the flu shot remains the most dangerous vaccine based on injuries and death compensated by the U.S. Government.

    The estimated 1,000 claims that the VICP anticipates being filed in 2016 are projected to cost $224 million. Although the VICP was originally created by Congress to shield drug companies producing government licensed, recommended and mandated vaccines for children, today it is not children but adults injured by influenza vaccine who are receiving most of the compensation.
    The majority of compensated flu shot injury claims are for nerve inflammation diagnosed as Guillain-Barré syndrome (GBS), an autoimmune disorder that attacks the nervous system and can result in life-long paralysis. Other complications include fibromyalgia, transverse myelitis, chronic inflammatory demyelinating polyneuropathy, acute disseminated encephalomyelitis, and death.
    Vaccine Injuries are Seldom Reported
    The U.S. Government keeps a database of reports documenting vaccine injuries and deaths called The Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS). The problem is that very few medical officials ever report vaccine injuries or deaths, either because they are not trained to recognized them, or due to pressure within their profession to not report them. To admit that vaccines do cause harm is professional suicide for most doctors and medical professionals.
    Hence, the quarterly DOJ report on vaccine cases only represents a tiny fraction of the actual cases that exist.
    One place we can get a glimpse of the amount of vaccine harm that is being caused in the U.S. today is to look at emergency room visits. As one can see in the report above, with most of the settlements being cases of harm caused by the flu vaccine, Guillain-Barré Syndrome (GBS) is the most common injury suffered from the flu shot. GBS is a debilitating disease that attacks a person’s own immune system and damages their nerve cells, causing muscle weakness and sometimes paralysis. It is very similar to the symptoms one may see with polio.
    If you are taken to the emergency room with signs of GBS during flu season, chances are one of the first questions the doctors will ask you is if you have received the flu shot recently. GBS is also listed as a side effect of the flu shot in the package insert.