WARNING: SOME PEOPLE MAY FIND THE INFORMATION IN THIS ARTICLE DISTURBING AND THE IMAGES GRAPHIC. Every year, some infants are circumcised. During this surgical procedure, part of the child’s protective penile tissue is removed. This tissue removed from his penis may be sold to companies and institutions seeking the rich human fibroblast cells and other cells it contains. Most people are unaware that for decades, vaccine companies have been using these foreskin cells to research, grow and develop vaccines.
According to the CDC, it is perfectly safe to vaccinate preterm babies by the same childhood vaccination schedule as full-term infants. “You can vaccinate premature babies according to chronological age”, the CDC says, meaning that there is no reason to delay vaccination until the infant has matured more, developmentally. The CDC states that “The vaccines cannot harm them and they will develop active immunity.” On its face, this is a remarkably bold lie from the CDC. After all, the CDC acknowledges that vaccination carries risks of adverse events in children born full-term, so how can it possibly be true that vaccination “cannot harm” infants born prematurely? Perhaps what the CDC is trying to communicate is that vaccination of preterm babies carries no greater risk. But if we assume this is simply a miscommunication, it would be a shockingly irresponsible one, particularly given that the CDC’s target audience for this information is medical professionals, from hospital administrators to physicians to medical students. In fact, the information just quoted comes from an online course presented by the CDC through its Training and Continuing Education Online program. Moreover, if we assume the CDC means to say that vaccination of premature infants does not place them at any greater risk, in the above video (presented by the team that made the documentary film Vaxxed), Suzanne Humphries, MD, shares research exposing what a dangerous lie this still would be. As she demonstrates, science informs us just the opposite: that vaccinating infants born prematurely puts them at significantly greater risk of a host of known adverse reactions.
Studies Link Heavy Metals to the Explosion of Neurodevelopmental Disorders and Declining IQ in American Children
A “silent pandemic of neurodevelopmental toxicity” is disabling a generation of children around the world. This is the verdict of neurology experts Philippe Grandjean and Philip Landrigan in a 2014 report in Lancet Neurology. The staggering tsunami of developmental disabilities now affects at least one in six children in the U.S. and millions more worldwide. Two new studies suggest that the most common of these illnesses—autism spectrum disorder (ASD), attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) and tics—are related to each other and may share common causation. The culprit? Environmental toxins, particularly heavy metals. About 11% (or one in nine 4-17-year-olds) have received an ADHD diagnosis—and in some states, as many as 19%. The most recent ASD estimates in the U.S., from 2014 data, report a prevalence of one in 45 children, representing a “significant increase” compared to 2011–2013. Adding to the worry, scientists and physicians are increasingly seeing children with multiple neurodevelopmental disorders. Children with “comorbid diagnoses” (i.e., more than one disorder) often have “greater levels of emotional, behavioral and educational impairment and the need for more intensive treatment.” Notably, ASD and ADHD frequently co-occur. The current version of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-V) recognizes this trend by allowing for a combined diagnosis, whereas prior versions (DSM-IV and DSM-IV-TR) barred simultaneous ADHD and ASD diagnoses.
Glyphosate, often sold under the brand name “Roundup,” is the most widely used weed killer in the U.S. Glyphosate is a “non-selective herbicide,” which means it kills many plants, not just weeds. It kills them by interfering with the production of critical proteins necessary for growth. In commercial agriculture, Roundup is used on “Roundup Ready” crops—crops that have been genetically modified to resist the powerful toxic effects of glyphosate. The list of Roundup Ready crops includes soy, corn, canola and sugar beets. It is important to remember that, while these plants have been modified to resist the harmful effects of glyphosate, the people and animals that eat them have not. In a series of articles, my colleague Anthony Samsel and I have been exploring the connection between glyphosate and a number of diseases, including multiple sclerosis, autism, Alzheimer’s disease, and cancer. In our most recent article, “Glyphosate Pathways to Modern Diseases VI: Prions, Amyloidoses and Autoimmune Neurological Diseases,” we present evidence that glyphosate has made its way into several widely used vaccines. We describe how the glyphosate residue contained in vaccines might induce the kind of autoimmune responses typically observed in autism. Interestingly, of all the vaccines we tested, MMR stood out as consistently having the highest level of glyphosate contamination. This fact may help explain why the MMR vaccine, which contains neither mercury nor aluminum, has been implicated so often in vaccine injury and autism. My research leads me to believe that synergistic toxicity between glyphosate and vaccines, particularly MMR, is a major factor in the growing autism epidemic.
It’s that time of year when parents receive school enrollment packages that include reminders of state school vaccine requirements. Many parents do not realize that most states offer exemptions for medical, religious or philosophical reasons. NVIC’s state vaccine law web pages are among our most highly visited web pages and our staff and volunteers work hard to keep them up-to-date with the most current vaccine and exemption information so that you understand your options. For reliable facts helpful in evaluating vaccine and disease risks, our web pages on diseases and vaccines are an excellent resource for you as a parent, and for your college-bound young adult.
In our toxin-filled world, we often look to government agencies to tell us what levels of exposure we should consider safe or unsafe. If our exposure does not exceed an agency-determined threshold, we assume there is little cause for concern. How do regulatory agencies determine these thresholds? There is considerable evidence to suggest that safety limits are often arbitrary and do not accurately flag risks. A new study published in Environmental Research by a group of researchers in upstate New York underscores this point.
The international journal Science of the Total Environment has just published a compelling study from the Republic of Korea, where autism prevalence is high. The study identifies a strong relationship between prenatal and early childhood exposure to mercury and autistic behaviors in five-year-olds.
The American Medical Association (AMA) has released a position statement that opposes the creation of a new federal commission on vaccine safety whose task is to study the association between autism and vaccines. “The AMA fully supports the overwhelming body of evidence and rigorous scientific process used by the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices which demonstrate vaccines are among the most effective and safest interventions to both prevent individual illness and protect the health of the public,” William E. Kobler, MD said in a statement. Dr. Kobler is a member of the AMA Board of Trustees. Autism is occurring at epidemic rates. We now have over 1,000,000 U.S. children diagnosed with autism. Something in our environment is responsible for causing the autism epidemic. It is not due to genetics. Could it be the increasing numbers of vaccines given to our children? Why wouldn’t any rational person want to study this association? A simple study comparing vaccinated with unvaccinated children could help decide whether vaccines are responsible for causing the autism epidemic. But, the Powers-That-Be, like the AMA, do not want this study done as it may turn their world upside down. In response to the AMA edicts supporting more vaccines and stating that no further research is needed, I and my colleagues have released a reply to the AMA letter.