Posts Tagged ‘vaccines’


Natural News

Tuesday, June 19, 2012 by: PF Louis

(NaturalNews) Suspicions have been confirmed for those wary of vaccinating their children. A recent large study corroborates other independent study surveys comparing unvaccinated children to vaccinated children.

They all show that vaccinated children have two to five times more childhood diseases, illnesses, and allergies than unvaccinated children.

Originally, the recent still ongoing study compared unvaccinated children against a German national health survey conducted by KiGGS involving over 17,000 children up to age 19. This currently ongoing survey study was initiated by classical homoeopathist Andreas Bachmair.

However, the American connection for Bachmair’s study can be found at VaccineInjury.info website that has added a link for parents of vaccinated children to participate in the study. So far this ongoing survey has well over 11,000 respondents, mostly from the U.S.A. Other studies have surveyed smaller groups of families.

Nevertheless, the results were similar. Of course, none of these studies were picked up by the MSM (mainstream media). None were funded by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) or the World Health Organization (WHO) or any national or international health agency or medical profession group (http://healthimpactnews.com).

They don’t dare compare the health of unvaccinated children to vaccinated children objectively and risk disrupting their vaxmania (vaccination mania). The focus for all the studies was mostly on childhood illnesses occurring as the children matured.

Dramatic, debilitating, or lethal vaccine injuries were not the focus since so few, five percent or less, actually get reported to VAERS (Vaccine Adverse Injury Reporting System) in the U.S.A. for various reasons including:

* It’s a complicated system that takes time from a doctor’s practice.
* Most parents don’t know about it.
* Only adverse reactions that occur immediately after vaccinations are considered.
* Since VAERS is voluntary, most doctors don’t want to incriminate themselves with vaccination injuries and maintain their denial of vaccine dangers.

Consequently, even the most terrible adverse reactions are minimally acknowledged, while long term negative health issues resulting from vaccines are not even considered relevant.

Different surveys summarized

The childhood diseases usually posed to respondents by the independent surveys involved asthma, reoccurring tonsillitis, chronic bronchitis, sinusitis, allergies, eczema, ear infections, diabetes, sleep disorders, bedwetting, dyslexia, migraines, hyperactivity, ADD, epilepsy, depression, and slower development of speech or motor skills.

In 1992, a New Zealand group called the Immunization Awareness Society (IAS) surveyed 245 families with a total of 495 children. The children were divided with 226 vaccinated and 269 unvaccinated. Eighty-one families had both vaccinated and unvaccinated children.

The differences were dramatic, with unvaccinated children showing far less incidence of common childhood ailments than vaccinated children (http://www.vaccineinjury.info/images/stories/ias1992study.pdf).

From a different survey in the South Island New Zealand city of Christchurch, among children born during or after 1977, none of the unvaccinated children had asthma events where nearly 25% of the vaccinated children were treated for asthma by age 10 (http://www.vaccineinjury.info/images/stories/ias1992study.pdf).

Many of the comments from non-vaccinating parents to VaccineInjury.info for the ongoing Bachmair survey mentioned vaccination danger and developing true immunity naturally were concerns (http://www.vaccineinjury.info).

A PhD immunologist who wrote the book Vaccine Illusion, Dr. Tetyana Obukhanych, has gone against the dogma of her medical training and background. She asserts that true immunity to any disease is not conferred by vaccines. Exposure to the disease, whether contracted or not, does (http://www.vaccinationcouncil.org).

Perhaps the most informal grass-roots survey going on now is by Tim O’Shea, DC, author of Vaccination is Not Immunization. He simply has non-vaccinating parents email him with comparisons of their children’s health to friends and families they know with vaccinated children. That and more is available on his site (http://www.thedoctorwithin.com).

Sources for this article include:

http://healthimpactnews.com

http://www.vaccineinjury.info/images/stories/ias1992study.pdf

Link to participate in Bachmair survey here: http://www.vaccineinjury.info

http://www.vaccinationcouncil.org

http://www.thedoctorwithin.com

Advertisements

Sunday, February 26, 2012 by: Jonathan Benson

(NaturalNews) If you choose to have your baby vaccinated with the combination diphtheria, tetanus, whooping cough (pertussis), polio and Haemophilus influenzae type 2 vaccine, a mega-jab collectively known as the DTap-IPV-Hib, your child may be at an increased risk of having a vaccine-induced seizure. A new study published in the Journal of the American Medical Association has identified a clear link between the vaccine and the onset of fever-related seizures, which the authors claim will not cause long-term damage.

Yuelian Sun from Aarhus University in Denmark and her colleagues evaluated data on roughly 380,000 babies born in Denmark between 2003 and 2008. Children in that country are recommended to get the vaccine at three different times — once when they are three months old, again when they are five months old, and a third time on their first birthday. Upon analysis, the researchers determined that about 7,800 of these children, or just over two percent, had been diagnosed with a fever-related seizure by the time they reach one-and-a-half years old.

The risk of having a fever-related seizure appears to increase after each subsequent jab with the vaccine, and particularly on the same day that it is administered. And yet the study authors and others insist the DTap-IPV-Hib vaccine is safe because such seizures allegedly do not cause brain damage or other permanent harm. Dr. Eugene Shapiro, a pediatrics and infectious diseases researcher at Yale University, actually purports that these findings are “reassuring,” and that parents should not be concerned.

Even more absurd was study author Sun’s response to the findings, in which she suggested that perhaps injected babies who had a seizure in response to the vaccine were just genetically prone to seizures, and that the vaccine had nothing to do with it. This and other nonsensical responses to studies that identify health risks associated with vaccines are typical. It is always anything but the vaccine that is responsible for causing harm — “Have you ever drunk raw milk at any time in your life? That must have been the cause of the seizure!”

DTap-IPV-Hib vaccine loaded with bacterial components, antibiotics, and toxic chemicals and additives

According to the Vaccine Awareness Network, the DTap-IPV-Hib vaccine contains diphtheria and tetanus toxoids, five components of the bordetella pertussis bacteria, filamentous haemagglutinin (the component of the bacteria which causes infection), pertactin (a highly immunogenic virulence factor), three types of inactivated polio virus, types 1, 2 and 3, a component of Haemophilus influenzae type B that has been attached to tetanus toxoid to make babies produce more antibodies, and three different types of antibiotics — neomycin, streptomycin, and polymyxin B.

Besides this barrage of pathogens and pathogenic components, the vaccine also contains deadly preservatives and additives like formaldehyde (rat poison), 2-phenoxyethanol (a detergent that is the main ingredient in anti-freeze), aluminum, and polysorbate 80 (an emulsifier implicated in causing male infertility).

There are also more than 3,500 reports in the Department of Health and Human Services‘ (HHS) Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) about serious adverse events associated with the DTap-IPV-Hib vaccine. These include, but are not limited to, Moraxella catarrhalis, streptococcus pneumonia, asthma, anaphylactic reactions, pancreatitis, gastrointestinal dysfunction, peripheral neuropathy, Guillain-Barre syndrome, and meningitis.

Sources for this article include:

http://www.reuters.com

http://text.vaccineriskawareness.com/Vaccines-And-How-They-Are-Made

http://www.medalerts.org/vaersdb/index.php


Curt Linderman Sr.
Infowars.com
Febrary 26, 2012

Patricia Finn, a New York Attorney (1) who represents victims and their families who have had severe adverse reactions following vaccination, has come under fire from the NYS Ninth Judicial District Grievance Committee. Patricia believes that this endless harassment of her stems from her outspokenness and publicity over her work ensuring that parents have the inherent and Constitutional rights they deserve while making informed vaccine decisions for their children. Patricia stated that all of this started in 2009, during a media storm when she represented health care workers in the State of New York regarding the H1N1 mandatory vaccination policy (2). This harassment has been ongoing since.

In an announcement given yesterday, Patti clearly states: “This morning I was served with papers to suspend my license to practice law. The charges are bogus and come on the heels of my address to the Parental Rights Rally in WV. I am also being ordered to disclose the names of people I represent who do not vaccinate…I refuse. I would go to jail first before I give out the names. Please contact all pro vac choice organizations and the media…know the truth! I call this harassment the Wakefield Effect! – Patricia Finn, Attorney.”

Of course there is cause to believe that this “Wakefield Effect” is exactly what is happening to Patricia. This is a common tactic of the elitist establishment: play ball or we will destroy you. Patti’s reference to the Parental Rights Rally in West Virginia stems from her offering the keynote address at the steps of the W.V. State Capitol on Wednesday, the 22nd of February (3 ). The rally was organized by parents of children in West Virginia to bring attention to the fascistic measures that parents must take in order to practice their Constitutional rights to protect their children from the Medical Industrial Complexes’ eugenics inspired vaccination protocol.

W. V. is one of only two states in the union that does not allow a religious nor philosophical exemption against vaccination; Mississippi is the other (4). This means that in the state of West Virginia, if you as a parent wish to keep your child from being injected with neurotoxins, animal DNA and viruses, aborted fetal cells, carcinogens and a myriad of other toxic materials, you have to get permission from the very doctors that have no problem injecting these into other little infants and children on a daily basis!

Patricia Finn is one of the few brave attorneys willing to take a stand against this socialist government policy and demand that parents be given back their rights to decide what is best for their children. In my recent conversation with Patti, the most disturbing thing seems to be that the last two complaints brought against her have been filed Sua Sponte or; on their own accord, meaning that no former client or public complainant has filed these charges but rather, the NYS Ninth Judicial District Grievance Committee themselves have filed them. So apparently when you can’t find another soulless elitist thief of liberty to do your dirty work, sometimes you just have to do it yourself.

These most recent charges have to do with suspected false advertising where the committee questions just how many clients Patricia has represented. This is also one of the reasons that this committee is demanding a list of names from her former and current clients, a clear violation of attorney/client privilege. This committee is placing charges on this undaunted attorney because she is bucking the system. This is plain and clear to all activists within the anti-vaccine/pro vaccine choice community since we witness these tactics on a daily basis. Patricia states in my recent interview with her, that she believes that the timing of these recent complaints was “designed to intimidate me and unsteady me, in anticipation of my key note address in West Virginia.”

I can assure you, the NYS Ninth Judicial District Grievance Committee has barked up the wrong tree with Patricia. She doesn’t seem to be easily intimidated at this point. Perhaps the fact that they have harassed her at work, bothered her family at home (to the point where her children are scared) might have something to do with this. Patricia states that this witch hunt has left her with little chance of making an income, countless hours spent dealing with these charges, and fearing for her family’s future.

I personally think she should be fearful. After all, when you come across a group that will defend the agenda of poisoning infants and children, what aren’t they capable of?

1. http://www.patriciafinnattorney.com/
2. http://www.nytimes.com/2009/10/14/health/policy/14vaccine.html
3. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bBTLe4BT7i4
4. http://www.ncsl.org/issues-research/health/school-immunization-exemption-state-laws.aspx

 


Thursday, February 16, 2012 by: Jonathan Benson

(NaturalNews) A Sacramento, Cal., family was recently bombarded by a news crew from KXTV News 10 and several officials from the Natomas Unified School District (NUSD) in Sacramento County for not vaccinating their daughter. Cayleh Morrison was one of several students in her neighborhood who legally refused the Tdap vaccination for tetanus, diphtheria, and pertussis (whooping cough), which prompted a surprise ambush at her home that is now the subject of a new lawsuit.

Courthouse News Service reports that on September 23, 2011, Heyman Matlock, the student service director of NUSD where Cayleh is a student; a school nurse; and a camera crew from KXTV came unannounced to Cayleh’s home in an attempt to forcefully administer the Tdap vaccine to her. The crew not only trespassed private property, but KXTV cameras filmed the house, the family, and a list containing detailed personal and medical information about Cayleh and the other “truant” students, all of which was broadcast on television.

“Plaintiff Leisa Wells (Cayleh’s mother) answered the door and found Mr. Matlock and the nurse on her doorstep, and was shocked to find that she was being filmed head-on by a KXTV television news crew as the crew was standing on her lawn,” says the complaint. “Mr. Matlock stated that he was there with the nurse to administer a Tdap vaccination to Cayleh Morrison. Shocked at being filmed in this interaction and with the presumptuousness of Mr. Matlock’s approach, she told him forcefully to leave, and closed the door.”

While canvassing the neighborhood in pursuit of the other unvaccinated children, Matlock apparently also implied to KXTV that Cayleh and the other children were “under an obligation to be vaccinated,” which is entirely false. California law provisions that individuals can opt out of getting vaccinated for both medical and philosophical reasons (http://www.nvic.org/Vaccine-Laws/state-vaccine-requirements.aspx).

But Matlock made no mention of this fact during his apparent vaccination crusade, which the lawsuit identifies as “intentionally disseminat[ing] negative information” that resulted in numerous “unwelcome contacts to the family from numerous places around the country.” The family’s contact information, of course, was visually displayed on screen during the KXTV report, as part of the charade.

Cayleh’s family is currently seeking damages for trespass, invasion of privacy, conspiracy, and unlawful dissemination of private information and school and medical records.

However, vaccine “non-compliance” stunts like this one could soon be replaced by forced vaccination of students in private, as drug company-backed legislation in California is currently pushing to allow secret vaccinations of young students without parental consent (http://www.naturalnews.com/033629_vaccinations_parental_consent.html).

Sources for this article include:

http://www.courthousenews.com/2012/02/10/43779.htm


Mike Barrett
Infowars.com
Thursday, February 16, 2012

For many years government and health officials have been trying to push vaccination on the people. While childhood vaccine exemption rates have been increasing, we have been seeing an overall increase in the amount of people receiving the flu shot each year.


There have even been numerous occasions where legislators and others have called for mandatory vaccinations that could affect health care workers in particular. In fact, many pediatricians are so angry with their patients who refuse vaccination that they are ‘firing’  patients and their families, refusing to play their role as doctor.

Pediatricians “Firing” Parents and Families for Refusing Vaccines for Children

That’s right, pediatricians are refusing to help parents — and their families —  if they aren’t ‘responsible’ enough to vaccinate their children. One study of Connecticut pediatricians found that some 30 percent of 133 doctors said they they refused to help a family due to vaccine refusal. Another survey of 909 Midwestern pediatricians found that 21 percent dismissed a family due to vaccine refusal.

While doctors are trained and told to ‘sell’ these vaccines, many people are becoming aware of vaccine dangers and risks. One study found that more than 1 in 10 parents are straying away from the traditional vaccine schedule, with the number to increase exponentially over the next few years. For doctors to refuse care for those making a decision for their own health is irresponsible to say the least.

Perhaps doctors should consider these truths about vaccines and the flu shot before ‘firing’ patients who refuse to be pricked.

  • Vaccines suppress the immune system which could actually increase your risk for contracting the flu for weeks or months.
  • The flu shot “protects” against  the influenza virus, but only about 20 percent of flu sicknesses are caused by influenza type A or B. The 80 percent remaining are caused by over 200 other bugs which make you feel like you have the flu.
  • Your immune system is the absolute best defense for any sickness.
After reviewing this information, it is no wonder why so many parents are refusing vaccines for their child. If your doctor is refusing to help you due to vaccine refusal, be sure to thank him later for making you find a different doctor.
This article first appeared at Natural Society

GreaterGoodMovie

THE GREATER GOOD looks behind the fear, hype and politics that have polarized the vaccine debate in America today. The film re-frames the emotionally charged issue and offers, for the first time, the opportunity for a rational and scientific discussion on how to create a safer and more effective vaccine program.

 

 


Mike Adams
Natural News
January 19, 2012

(NaturalNews) The weaponization of vaccines just took another leap forward in America with the recent air-dropping of rabies vaccines by the Texas Department of State Health Services. Using a battery of small planes based out of Del Rio, Texas recently dropped 1.8 million edible vaccine packets over 7,700 square miles of rural Texas.

The packets contain edible rabies vaccines dipped in fish oil and coated with fish meal to entice foxes and coyotes to eat them. Once consumed, the animal is “vaccinated” against rabies, researchers claim.

Of course, what these researchers don’t yet understand in their scientific ignorance (and arrogance) is that they are also engaged in a rabies DNA / RNA bombardment of Texas. As even the Institute of Medicine has admitted, MMR vaccines for use in humans actually cause measles because many of the vaccines contain live viral strains. (http://www.naturalnews.com/033447_Institute_of_Medicine_vaccines.html)

Vaccine manufacturing is conducted under such poor quality control today that vaccines are routinely shipped out the door containing viable viral strains that often infect and sometimes even kill human victims. For example, in 2009 Baxter Pharmaceuticals was caught red-handed shipping out live avian flu viruses to 18 countries (http://www.naturalnews.com/025760.html).

What Texas Dept. of State Health Services workers probably don’t yet grasp is that vaccine manufacturers routinely use vaccines to spread the very disease they claim to be preventing. By injecting live rabies strains into a small percentage of the vaccines dropped on Texas (say, one percent), they are effectively engaging in a DNA carpet-bombing run that will absolutely guarantee rabies continues to remain endemic throughout feral animal populations in the state. This, of course, will result in yet more rabies vaccines being purchased to “combat the problem,” thereby achieving the goal of the entire scam: To sell more vaccines to the government.

Vaccines become weapons to be inflicted on innocents

This air-dropping of vaccines over Texas is all part of the militarization of modern medicine taking place today. In just the past few months, we’ve seen the AMA calling for “mandatory participation” in vaccine trials, where you would be “volunteered” by the government to be injected with an experiment vaccine, at threat of arrest (http://www.prisonplanet.com/ama-journal-make-participation-in-vaccine-tri…).

We’ve also seen cases where police have been called and CPS workers threatened to take children away from parents who refused to vaccinate their children (http://www.infowars.com/doctor-calls-police-child-services-on-mother-who-…).

The Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation has already conducted bizarre experiments on genetically engineered mosquitoes that carry vaccines to be silently injected into unsuspecting humans. And that same foundation has also invested heavily in covert vaccination technology that could, for example, vaccinate you with a spray mist used at airport security checkpoints (http://www.naturalnews.com/028887_vaccines_Bill_Gates.html).

As these examples show, vaccines are increasingly being used in the context of weapons: air-dropped, covertly injected or even forcibly injected at gunpoint. These are signs of a system of medicine that operates like a police state, where people are stripped of their rights and freedoms “for the good of society.” The individual is sacrificed, in other words, to serve the interests of the state. Such a philosophy is fully consistent with the entire history of secret government-funded medical experiments against blacks (Tuskegee), Guatemalans (http://www.naturalnews.com/033483_Guatemalan_prisoners_medical_experiments.html), and even criminal medical experiments involving Dr. Jonas Salk and the polio vaccine (http://www.naturalnews.com/031564_Jonas_Salk_medical_experiments.html).

Here’s a list of just a few of the criminal, inhuman medical experiments that have been conducted on innocent people by the U.S. government: http://www.naturalnews.com/022383_research_experiments.html

All this adds up to classic eugenics — especially given that vaccines in humans are strongly tied to lifelong infertility, spontaneous abortions and birth defects. It’s all part of a human de-population agenda that Bill Gates has openly admitted to in his public speeches about “reducing world population” with the help of vaccines (http://www.naturalnews.com/029911_vaccines_Bill_Gates.html).

The law of unintended consequences will come back to haunt Texas

The state of Texas, of course, claims its air-dropped rabies vaccines have been a huge success. Rabies cases have plummeted in every area targeted by the vaccine carpet-bombing runs, they insist. But even if you believe those numbers, you must ask: At what cost?

What are the unintended consequences of air-dropping viral fragments of rabies over 7,000 square miles of open terrain? Engaging in such an act is just begging to be humbled by nature as that viral material gets recombined into some other deadly pathogen that exists in the wild, creating a hybrid “Franken-virus” that never would have existed without this arrogant “scientific” intervention. Can you imagine a “rabies bird flu pandemic?” Mother Nature can!

Add to this the fact that many deer in Texas are being fed genetically modified corn (GMOs), and you now have engineered genetic material from bt corn residing in the flesh of deer that might be consumed by the very same coyotes who are eating the air-dropped rabies vaccines. What might be the consequences of such a dangerous genetic experiment involving tens of thousands of animals in the wild?

No one knows. And that’s the point, because the Texas scientists don’t know either. They were all educated at Texas A&M which is still stuck in the era of chemical agriculture, and they think spraying everything with Roundup is the solution. (Seriously, Texas A&M graduates are totally infatuated with the use of chemical pesticides on everything…) They don’t know anything about the dangers of GMOs, nor the recent research published in Cell Research that shows how microRNA (small fragments of genetic code) can pass through the digestive system, attach to organs such as the liver, and alter the physiology of those organs. (http://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2012/01/the-very-real-danger-of…)

These “scientists” do not know what they are doing. They are narrow-minded and short-sighted. They play God with Mother Nature and hope they don’t make a mistake. They risk the future integrity of Texas agriculture and wildlife on their bizarre Frankensteinian schemes that run the risk of wreaking total havoc with the biosphere. They are, like most other conventional scientists, blinded by their arrogance.

It’s too late to stop them, of course. This program has been going on for 18 years, they say. And they claim it’s an amazing success! It’s so successful, in fact, that now they’re moving on to develop an airdrop vaccine for skunks. So in 2012 and beyond, they’ll be carpet-bombing Texas with skunk rabies vaccines.

Gee, did they ever consider the possibility that the reason skunks have so much rabies is because they’ve been dropping rabies DNA / RNA onto the landscape for nearly two decades? And after they treat the skunks, they still have a long list of animals to target with yet more vaccines, see? What about a raccoon vaccine? How about wild pig vaccines? Deer vaccines? At what point does this effort vaccinate all the wild animals of the world ever end?

If they keep this up, before long Texas will become a DNA battlefield where the entire natural ecosystem is massively contaminated with genetic intervention at every level.

But of course, it keeps the vaccine companies in business, doesn’t it? And as Rick Perry proved with his HPV Gardasil scandal, Texas loves to force vaccines on innocent people while collecting payoffs from the drug companies that make them. (http://www.naturalnews.com/033705_Gardasil_Rick_Perry.html)

You can bet someone in the Texas Department of State Health Services is receiving a nice, fat payoff for all this.

Sources include:
http://www.foxnews.com/health/2012/01/18/texas-nearly-ends-rabies-with-ae…

 


Hallmark now distributing vaccine shot compliance cards targeting newborns across America

Mike Adams
Natural News
December 9, 2011

(NaturalNews) The Arizona Department of Health Services wants to remind parents to inject their newborn babies with neurologically-damaging chemical adjuvants found in vaccines, and to aid in this effort, they’ve teamed up with Hallmark, the famous greeting card company.

Hallmark has designed and provided a special “vaccine shot tracking” card — an “Immunization Record” — that features the following vaccine propaganda:

Bet you’re as proud
as you can be
of that new little branch
on your family tree!

One of the most important roles as a parent is to make sure your baby is immunized.

Keeping your little one healthy mean starting immunizations by two months of age.

…The following immunizations are recommended before the age of 2…

See the inside of the card yourself at:
http://www.naturalnews.com/images/F…

And the outside of the card here:
http://www.naturalnews.com/images/F…

The outside also adds:

Hallmark is committed to encouraging childhood immunizations… for additional information on the program, go to www.Hallmark.com and search “for America’s babies”

 

For America’s babies?

 

Maybe you should instead search for “death for America’s babies.” That’s what these vaccines often cause, of course: Death, seizures, neurological damage, autism, fevers, vomiting and much more (http://www.naturalnews.com/029586_A…)

I find it fascinating that Hallmark, a greeting card company that usually churns out feel-good blessings and warm fuzzy limericks is now openly advocating chemicals that kill babies.

And they can’t even claim to be “saving” more children than the vaccines are killing, either. Because it turns out that unvaccinated children are overall far healthier than vaccinated children! (http://www.naturalnews.com/033858_u…)

 

Targeting Latino newborns? Si! Se puede!

 

But of course, we know the real agenda of pushing vaccines to new moms in Arizona. I lived in Tucson for many years and I’ve seen the local politics at work. Arizona is a state that’s overrun by the financial costs of providing medical care to so-called “illegals” — undocumented residents who pay little or no taxes but often burden the state’s coffers for hospital expenditures.

What I see in this Hallmark vaccine shot propaganda card is an effort to promote widespread infertility across the Latino population of Arizona. That’s what vaccines do best, of course — induce infertility in both men and women. That’s why Bill Gates, the ultra-wealthy globalist behind the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, specifically stated that vaccines and health care services could be used to “reduce population by 10 – 15 percent.” (http://www.naturalnews.com/029911_v…)

Perhaps Arizona Governor Jan Brewer agrees with that assessment. What better way to reduce Arizona’s financial burden on the Latino community than to make sure as many as possible get sterilized at the earliest available opportunity?

All the better that the entire campaign can be shrouded in the language of “caring for your precious little baby.” You mean the baby that cost the state of Arizona a hundred thousand dollars in emergency childbirth expenses that will never be repaid? That’s the kind of baby the state wants to prevent from ever happening again, it turns out. That’s what the state politicians are saying behind closed doors, in reality.

They figure you can’t just force all the Latinos to be sterilized by injection. So instead, you have to trick them into sterilizing their own little children. Nothing halts the family tree as quickly as a few rounds of voluntary vaccine shots for momma and daughter. And heck, even if the shots don’t kill ‘em, the child will have a weakened immune system which translates into a lifetime of Big Pharma revenue from sickness and disease.

 

Everyone AROUND your baby should get vaccinated, too!

 

Continuing the propaganda push, the AZ Department of Health Services includes yet another piece of printed propaganda, claiming that everyone around your baby must also get vaccinated with multiple vaccine shots.

See that insert here:
http://www.naturalnews.com/images/A…

So now you’re supposed to push every member of the family to go get vaccinated for the benefit of the baby!

See how this works? So cousin Jorge, who is about to impregnate another Latino teen, can get sterilized too. It’s sort of like a viral form of socially-enforced sterilization, brought to you by the wonderful people at the state of Arizona and Hallmark, headquartered in Kansas City.

 

Newborns targeted in Colorado, too

 

NaturalNews has learned that Hallmark is also conspiring with Colorado officials to push vaccine shot compliance cards onto new moms across that state, too.

In a recent press release, the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment proclaimed it would:

“…distribute custom-made Hallmark greeting cards statewide to welcome newborns and inform new parents about the importance of childhood immunizations.” (http://www.cdphe.state.co.us/releas…)

No doubt other states are also working on similar programs to distribute Hallmark’s vaccine compliance propaganda to the new moms in their own states.

 

The great medical IQ test

 

What’s most interesting about all this is that people who choose to receive vaccine shots are all winning the Darwin award by effectively removing their own future generations from the gene pool. These vaccines create a trans-generational sterilization burden that increases with each successive generation until it brings newborns to the point of genetic extinction (http://www.naturalnews.com/033406_v…). That’s why I’ve called flu shots a “great IQ test” to see who is stupid enough to actually take them. In a way, the globalists are actually trying to reverse the “moronification” of the human race by eliminating low-IQ people from the future of human fertility.

And it turns out that gullible people who inject their own children with toxic vaccines come from all races and nationalities: White, black, Latino, Asian, you name it! That’s why vaccines, as they are irresponsibly pushed on children today with the use of brain-damaging chemical adjuvants, are really a crime against humanity.

You can surround these crimes with warm and fuzzy language in a Hallmark card, but that doesn’t make it any less of a crime, of course. It’s still a chemical assault on an innocent child, and that’s a crime no matter how many fuzzy bears and cuddly cartoons you slap on the front of a greeting card.

In the mean time, I recommend we all boycott Hallmark for their role in pushing dangerous and often deadly vaccines onto newborns in Arizona. It’s yet another example of shameful corporate behavior that betrays the trust of the people while serving the selfish interests of the State.


Click for larger image


Click for larger image


Not 60% as you’ve been told

Mike Adams
Natural News
Thursday, October 27, 2011

A new scientific study published in The Lancet reveals that influenza vaccines only prevent influenza in 1.5 out of every 100 adults who are injected with the flu vaccine. Yet, predictably, this report is being touted by the quack science community, the vaccine-pushing CDC and the scientifically-inept mainstream media as proof that “flu vaccines are 60% effective!”


This absurd claim was repeated across the mainstream media over the past few days, with all sorts of sloppy reporting that didn’t even bother to read the study itself (as usual).

NaturalNews continues to earn a reputation for actually READING these “scientific” studies and then reporting what they really reveal, not what some vaccine-pushing CDC bureaucrat wants them to say. So we purchased the PDF file from The Lancet and read this study to get the real story.

The “60% effectiveness” claim is a total lie – here’s why

What we found is that the “60% effectiveness” claim is utterly absurd and highly misleading. For starters, most people think that “60% effectiveness” means that for every 100 people injected with the flu shot, 60 of them won’t get the flu!

Thus, the “60% effectiveness” claim implies that getting a flu shot has about a 6 in 10 chance of preventing you from getting the flu.

This is utterly false.

In reality — and this is spelled out right in Figure 2 of the study itself, which is entitled, “Efficacy and effectiveness of influenza vaccines: a systematic review and meta-analysis” — only about 2.7 in 100 adults get the flu in the first place!

See the abstract at:
http://www.thelancet.com/journals/l…

Flu vaccine stops influenza in only 1.5 out of 100 adults who get the shots

Let’s start with the actual numbers from the study.

The “control group” of adults consisted of 13,095 non-vaccinated adults who were monitored to see if they caught influenza. Over 97% of them did not. Only 357 of them caught influenza, which means only 2.7% of these adults caught the flu in the first place.

The “treatment group” consisted of adults who were vaccinated with a trivalent inactivated influenza vaccine. Out of this group, according to the study, only 1.2% did not catch the flu.

The difference between these two groups is 1.5 people out of 100.

So even if you believe this study, and even if you believe all the pro-vaccine hype behind it, the truly “scientific” conclusion from this is rather astonishing:

Flu vaccines only prevent the flu in 1.5 out of every 100 adults injected with the vaccine!

Note that this is very, very close to my own analysis of the effectiveness vaccines as I wrote back in September of 2010 in an article entitled, Evidence-based vaccinations: A scientific look at the missing science behind flu season vaccines (http://www.naturalnews.com/029641_v…)

In that article, I proclaimed that flu vaccines “don’t work on 99 out of 100 people.” Apparently, if you believe the new study, I was off by 0.5 people out of 100 (at least in adults, see below for more discussion of effectiveness on children).

So where does the media get “60% effective?”

This is called “massaging the numbers,” and it’s an old statistical trick that the vaccine industry (and the pharmaceutical industry) uses over and over again to trick people into thinking their useless drugs actually work.

First, you take the 2.73% in the control group who got the flu, and you divide that into the 1.18% in the treatment group who got the flu. This gives you 0.43.

You can then say that 0.43 is “43% of 2.73,” and claim that the vaccine therefore results in a “57% decrease” in influenza infections. This then becomes a “57% effectiveness rate” claim.

The overall “60% effectiveness” being claimed from this study comes from adding additional data about vaccine efficacy for children, which returned higher numbers than adults (see below). There were other problems with the data for children, however, including one study that showed an increase in influenza rates in the second year after the flu shot.

So when the media (or your doctor, or pharmacist, or CDC official) says these vaccines are “60% effective,” what they really mean is that you would have to inject 100 adults to avoid the flu in just 1.5 of them.

Or, put another way, flu vaccines do nothing in 98.5% of adults.

But you’ve probably already noticed that the mainstream media won’t dare print this statistical revelation. They would much rather mislead everybody into the utterly false and ridiculous belief that flu vaccines are “60% effective,” whatever that means.

How to lie with statistics

This little statistical lying technique is very popular in the cancer industry, too, where these “relative numbers” are used to lie about all sorts of drugs.

You may have heard, for example, that a breast cancer drug is “50% effective at preventing breast cancer!”

But what does that really mean? It could mean that 2 women out of 100 got breast cancer in the control group, and only 1 woman out of 100 got it in the treatment group. Thus, the drug is only shown to work on 1 out of 100 women.

But since 1 is 50% of 2, they will spin the store and claim a “50% breast cancer prevention rate!” And most consumers will buy into this because they don’t understand how the medical industry lies with these statistics. So they will think to themselves, “Wow, if I take this medication, there is a 50% chance this will prevent breast cancer for me!”

And yet that’s utterly false. In fact, there is only a 1% chance it will prevent breast cancer for you, according to the study.

Minimizing side effects with yet more statistical lies

At the same time the vaccine and drug industries are lying with relative statistics to make you think their drugs really work (even when they don’t), they will also use absolute statistics to try to minimize any perception of side effects.

In the fictional example given above for a breast cancer drug, let’s suppose the drug prevented breast cancer in 1 out of 100 women, but while doing that, it caused kidney failure in 4 out of 100 women who take it. The manufacturer of the drug would spin all this and say something like the following:

“This amazing new drug has a 50% efficacy rate! But it only causes side effects in 4%!”

You see how this game is played? So they make the benefits look huge and the side effects look small. But in reality — scientifically speaking — you are 400% more likely to be injured by the drug than helped by it! (Or 4 times more likely, which is the same thing stated differently.)

How many people are harmed by influenza vaccines?

Much the same is true with vaccines. In this influenza vaccine study just published in The Lancet, it shows that you have to inject 100 adults to avoid influenza in just 1.5 adults. But what they don’t tell you is the side effect rate in all 100 adults!

It’s very likely that upon injecting 100 adults with vaccines containing chemical adjuvants (inflammatory chemicals used to make flu vaccines “work” better), you might get 7.5 cases of long-term neurological side effects such as dementia or Alzheimer’s. This is an estimate, by the way, used here to illustrate the statistics involved.

So for every 100 adults you injected with this flu vaccine, you prevent the flu in 1.5 of them, but you cause a neurological disorder in 7.5 of them! This means you are 500% more likely to be harmed by the flu vaccine than helped by it. (A theoretical example only. This study did not contain statistics on the harm of vaccines.)

Much the same is true with mammograms, by the way, which harm 10 women for every 1 woman they actually help (http://www.naturalnews.com/020829.html).

Chemotherapy is also a similar story. Sure, chemotherapy may “shrink tumors” in 80% of those who receive it, but shrinking tumors does not prevent death. And in reality, chemotherapy eventually kills most of those who receive it. Many of those people who describe themselves as “cancer survivors” are, for the most part, actually “chemo survivors.”

Good news for children?

If there’s any “good news” in this study, it’s that the data show vaccines to be considerably more effective on children than on adults. According to the actual data (from Figure 2 of the study itself), influenza vaccines are effective at preventing influenza infections in 12 out of 100 children.

So the best result of the study (which still has many problems, see below) is that the vaccines work on 12% of children who are injected. But again, this data is almost certainly largely falsified in favor of the vaccine industry, as explained below. It also completely ignores the vaccine / autism link, which is provably quite real and yet has been politically and financially swept under the rug by the criminal vaccine industry (which relies on scientific lies to stay in business).

Guess who funded this study?

This study was funded by the Alfred P. Sloan Foundation, the very same non-profit that gives grant money to Wikipedia (which has an obvious pro-vaccine slant), and is staffed by pharma loyalists.

For example, the Vice President for Human Resources and Program Management at the Alfred P. Sloan Foundation is none other than Gail Pesyna, a former DuPont executive (DuPont is second in the world in GMO biotech activities, just behind Monsanto) with special expertise in pharmaceuticals and medical diagnostics. (http://www.sloan.org/bio/item/10)

The Alred P. Sloan Foundation also gave a $650,000 grant to fund the creation of a film called “Shots in the Dark: The Wayward Search for an AIDS Vaccine,” (http://www.sloan.org/assets/files/a…) which features a pro-vaccine slant that focuses on the International AIDS Vaccine Initiative, an AIDS-centric front group for Big Pharma which was founded by none other than the Rockefeller Foundation (http://www.vppartners.org/sites/def…).

Seven significant credibility problems with this Lancet study

Beyond all the points already mentioned above, this study suffers from at least seven significant problems that any honest journalist should have pointed out:

Problem #1) The “control” group was often given a vaccine, too

In many of the studies used in this meta analysis, the “control” groups were given so-called “insert” vaccines which may have contained chemical adjuvants and other additives but not attenuated viruses. Why does this matter? Because the adjuvants can cause immune system disorders, thereby making the control group more susceptible to influenza infections and distorting the data in favor of vaccines. The “control” group, in other words, wasn’t really a proper control group in many studies.

Problem #2) Flu vaccines are NEVER tested against non-vaccinated healthy children

It’s the most horrifying thought of all for the vaccine industry: Testing healthy, non-vaccinated children against vaccinated children. It’s no surprise, therefore, that flu shots were simply not tested against “never vaccinated” children who have avoided flu shots for their entire lives. That would be a real test, huh? But of course you will never see that test conducted because it would make flu shots look laughably useless by comparison.

Problem #3) Influenza vaccines were not tested against vitamin D

Vitamin D prevents influenza at a rate that is 8 times more effective than flu shots (http://www.naturalnews.com/029760_v…). Read the article to see the actual “absolute” numbers in this study.

Problem #4) There is no observation of long-term health effects of vaccines

Vaccines are considered “effective” if they merely prevent the flu. But what if they also cause a 50% increase in Alzheimer’s two decades later? Is that still a “success?” If you’re a drug manufacturer it is, because you can make money on the vaccine and then later on the Alzheimer’s pills, too. That’s probably why neither the CDC nor the FDA ever conducts long-term testing of influenza vaccines. They simply have no willingness whatsoever to observe and record the actual long-term results of vaccines.

Problem #5) 99.5% of eligible studies were excluded from this meta-analysis

There were 5,707 potentially eligible studied identified for this meta-analysis study. A whopping 99.5% of those studies were excluded for one reason or another, leaving only 28 studies that were “selected” for inclusion. Give that this study was published in a pro-vaccine medical journal, and authored by researchers who likely have financial ties to the vaccine industry, it is very difficult to imagine that this selection of 28 studies was not in some way slanted to favor vaccine efficacy.

Remember: Scientific fraud isn’t the exception in modern medicine; it is the rule. Most of the “science” you read in today’s medical journals is really just corporate-funded quackery dressed up in the language of science.

Problem #6) Authors of the studies included in this meta-analysis almost certainly have financial ties to vaccine manufacturers

I haven’t had time to follow the money ties for each individual study and author included in this meta analysis, but I’m willing to publicly and openly bet you large sums of money that at least some of these study authors have financial ties to the vaccine industry (drug makers). The corruption, financial influence and outright bribery is so pervasive in “scientific” circles today that you can hardly find a published author writing about vaccines who hasn’t been in some way financially influenced (or outright bought out) by the vaccine industry itself. It would be a fascinating follow-up study to explore and reveal all these financial ties. But don’t expect the medical journals to print that article, of course. They’d rather not reveal what happens when you follow the money.

Problem #7) The Lancet is, itself, a pro-vaccine propaganda mouthpiece funded by the vaccine industry!

Need we point out the obvious? Trusting The Lancet to report on the effectiveness of vaccines is sort of like asking the Pentagon to report on the effectiveness of cruise missiles. Does anyone really think we’re going to get a truthful report from a medical journal that depends on vaccine company revenues for its very existence?

That’s a lot like listening to big government tell you how great government is for protecting your rights. Or listening to the Federal Reserve tell you why the Fed is so good for the U.S. economy. You might as well just ask the Devil whether you should be good or evil, eh?

Just for fun, let’s conduct a thought experiment and suppose that The Lancet actually reported the truth, and that this study was conducted with total honesty and perfect scientific integrity. Do you realize that even if you believe all this, the study concludes that flu vaccines only prevent the flu in 1.5 out of 100 adults?

Or to put it another way, even when pro-vaccine medical journals publish pro-vaccine studies paid for by pro-vaccine non-profit groups, the very best data they can manage to contort into existence only shows flu vaccines preventing influenza in 1.5 out of 100 adults.

Gee, imagine the results if all these studies were independent reviews with no financial ties to Big Pharma! Do you think the results would be even worse? You bet they would. They would probably show a negative efficacy rate, meaning that flu shots actually cause more cases of influenza to appear. That’s the far more likely reality of the situation.

Flu shots, you see, actually cause the flu in some people. That’s why the people who get sick with the flu every winter are largely the very same people who got flu shots! (Just ask ‘em yourself this coming winter, and you’ll see.)

What the public believes

Thanks to the outright lies of the CDC, the flu shot propaganda of retail pharmacies, and the quack science published in conventional medical journals, most people today falsely believe that flu shots are “70 to 90 percent effective.” This is the official propaganda on the effectiveness of vaccines.

It is so pervasive that when this new study came out reporting vaccines to be “only” 60% effective, some mainstream media outlets actually published articles with headlines like, “Vaccines don’t work as well as you might have thought.” These headlines were followed up with explanations like “Even though we all thought vaccines were up to 90% effective, it turns out they are only 60% effective!”

I hate to break it to ‘em all, but the truth is that flu shots, even in the best case the industry can come up with, really only prevent the flu in 1.5 out of 100 adults.

Or, put another way, when you see 100 adults lined up at a pharmacy waiting to receive their coveted flu shots, nearly 99 out of those 100 are not only wasting their time (and money), but may actually be subjecting themselves to long-term neurological damage as a result of being injected with flu shot chemical adjuvants.

Outright fraudulent marketing

Given their 1.5% effectiveness among adults, the marketing of flu shots is one of the most outrageous examples of fraudulent marketing ever witnessed in modern society. Can you imagine a car company selling a car that only worked 1.5% of the time? Or a computer company selling a computer that only worked 1.5% of the time? They would be indicted for fraud by the FTC!

So why does the vaccine industry get away with marketing its flu shots that even the most desperately pro-vaccine statistical analysis reveals only works on 1.5 out of 100 adults?

It’s truly astonishing. This puts flu shots in roughly the same efficacy category as rubbing a rabbit’s foot or wishing really hard. That this is what passes as “science” today is so snortingly laughable that it makes your ribs hurt.

That so many adults today buy into this total marketing fraud is a powerful commentary on the gullibility of the population and the power of TV-driven news propaganda. Apparently, actually getting people to buy something totally useless that might actually harm them (or kill them) isn’t difficult these days. Just shroud it all under “science” jargon and offer prizes to the pharmacy workers who strong-arm the most customers to get injected. And it works!

The real story on flu shots that you probably don’t want to know

Want to know the real story on what flu shots are for? They aren’t for halting the flu. We’ve already established that. They hardly work at all, even if you believe the “science” on that.

So what are flu shots really for?

You won’t like this answer, but I’ll tell you what I now believe to be true: The purpose of flu shots is to “soft kill” the global population. Vaccines are population control technologies, as openly admitted by Bill Gates (http://www.naturalnews.com/029911_v…) and they are so cleverly packaged under the fabricated “public health” message that even those who administer vaccines have no idea they are actually engaged in the reduction of human population through vaccine-induced infertility and genetic mutations.

Vaccines ultimately have but one purpose: To permanently alter the human gene pool and “weed out” those humans who are stupid enough to fall for vaccine propaganda.

And for that nefarious purpose, they probably are 60% effective after all.

 


Anthony Gucciardi
Activist Post
Wednesday, October 26, 2011

Obama administration officials are debating whether or not a study should be launched which would lead to injecting healthy children with the anthrax vaccine in an experiment to “see whether the shots would safely protect them against a bioterrorism attack.”


Of course the safety of the anthrax vaccine has been questioned in the past by health professionals and the former Senate Majority Leader — also a physician. That is why the Obama administration is using the threat of bioterrorism as a method of getting the public to submit to the study through fear.

The administration had mainstream health officials touting the vaccine as a way to ‘protect’ the children from the threat of bioterrorism.

“At the end of the day, do we want to wait for an attack and give it to millions and millions of children and collect data at that time?” said Daniel B. Fagbuyi of Children’s National Medical Center in Washington, who chaired the group. “Or do we want to say: ‘How do we best protect our children?’ We can take care of Grandma and Grandpa, Uncle and Auntie. But right now, we have nothing for the children.”

Evidence shows the anthrax vaccine is dangerous

Daniel B. Fagbuyi portrays the study as a necessary means of protecting the children, but evidence shows the anthrax vaccine is actually quite dangerous — not ‘protective’ as the Obama administration officials make it out to be. In 2001 when letters containing anthrax were mailed to several congressional leaders, former Senate Majority Leader and physician Bill Frist spoke out against the shot. He told CNN:

“There are very real and potentially serious side effects from the vaccine and anyone who elects to receive the vaccine needs to be made aware of that. I do not recommend widespread inoculation. There are too many side effects and if there is limited chance of exposure- the side effects would far outweigh any potential advantage.”

In a 2007 report by the CDC in conjunction with theVaccine Healthcare Centers of the Department of Defense and the watchdog group Government Accountability found that ”between 1 and 2 percent” of vaccinated military personnel experienced ”severe adverse events, which could result in disability or death.”

Between 2001 and 2004, the FDA Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) received 4,136 spontaneous adverse event reports: 347 (8.4%) were reported as serious.

Serious adverse events include: death, hospitalization, permanent disability, or are life-threatening. There were 16 deaths.

If the anthrax vaccine is to bested on children, perhaps it should be tested on the children of those who are calling for the study. The Obama administration should be willing to inject their own children with the anthrax vaccine if they are so confident that the test is necessary. Ignoring the warnings of physicial Bill Frist and the 2007 CDC report, government officials are now calling for your children to be injected with the anthrax vaccine in order to ‘protect’ against bioterrorism, so why wouldn’t they want their own children to be protected? Perhaps it has to do with monetary incentive.

The almighty dollar behind the anthrax vaccine push

On May 2, 2011, mega corporation Emergent Biosolutions announced that the federal governmentwould be purchasing 3.42 million doses of the anthrax vaccine to add to the civilian anthrax vaccine stockpile. Emergent Biosolutions was formerly known as Bioport, the manufacturer of Biothrax, which is the only anthrax vaccine approved by the FDA.

The purchase adds about $101 million to the overall contact for the DHHS’ anthrax stockpile, boosting the value to about $500 million. The company has made $2.4 billion since 2004 alone, which could climb to over $2 billion if the government purchases the 75 million doses it said it needed. This purchase is in addition to the military anthrax vaccine stockpile.

In fact, the Washington Business Journal reports that Emergent generates the majority of its profits from federal public health agencies.

‘Emergent proudly supports the U.S. government’s efforts and unwavering commitment to meet its stated need of 75 million doses of anthrax vaccines,’ said Fuad El-Hibri, chairman and chief executive officer of Emergent BioSolutions. ‘This contract is an indication that BioThrax remains a critical component of the government’s arsenal of biodefense medical countermeasures. In addition to this contract modification, we are continuing discussions with the U.S. government regarding a follow-on procurement contract, which we anticipate will cover a multi-year period.

Emergent Biosolutions also secured a $186.6 million contract for a recombinant protein antigen to combat anthrax and a $28.7 million contract for a third-generation vaccine.

The question is how did Emergent Biosolutions manage to obtain such profitable US government contracts for the anthrax vaccine?

According to political analyst Scott Lilly:

The Emergant model extracts contracts from the US government at exorbitant high profit margins, compared to the cost of manufacture. The vaccine vials expire after 3-4 years, requiring continuous replenishment–guaranteeing sales of at least $100 million / year to the manufacturer for the foreseeable future.  However the expenditure throws taxpayer money into a black hole.

Is the DHHS pushing the dangerous anthrax vaccine just to justify vaccine profits?

The disturbing history of government health and vaccine trials

The history of US health and vaccine trials is so unnerving that President Obama has described one such event as ‘shocking,’ ‘tragic,’ and ‘reprehensible’. Obama made these statements in October of 2010, when he apologized to Guatemala for tests conducted during the 1940s that deliberately infected 700 prisoners with syphilis to examine the effects. The researchers went so far as to pour the syphilis-causing bacteria onto the bodies of prisoners with skin abrasions. Another method involved forcing the prisoners to sleep with prostitutes.

The 40-year long Tuskegee experiments were another gruesome ‘experiment’ of the United States government. In order to perform the study, the US Public Health Service withheld syphilis treatment from infected black men to measure the effects of the disease. Again, this took place over a 40 year period.

As you can see, the anthrax vaccine is controversial for a reason. It is a risky, dangerous, and even deadly vaccine that has a questionable history going as far back as its production.

Please visit Natural Society for more great health news and vaccine information.

RELATED ACTIVIST POST ARTICLE:
More Anthrax Vaccine Contracts Issued: 44.75 Million Doses of BioThrax Over 5 Years