DDT spraying in neighborhoods in 1946 to control polio. Image from YouTube video.

by Christina England
Health Impact News

In a recent interview, obstetrician and gynecologist Dr. Wahome Ngare stated that:

“The World Health Organization and other UN organizations together with eugenic organizations like the IPPF have had a population control agenda aimed at the lower developed countries (LDC) for a long time.”

To back his powerful and damning statement, Dr. Ngare produced a document titled National Security Study Memorandum 200 (NSSM 200) – April 1974, outlining the U.S. government’s plans to lower the population in the following countries: 

“India, Bangladesh, Pakistan, Nigeria, Mexico, Indonesia, Brazil, The Philippines, Thailand, Egypt, Turkey, Ethiopia, and Colombia.”

Part two, titled Introduction: A U.S. Global Population Strategy, stated:

“From year to year we are learning more about what kind of fertility reduction is feasible in differing LDC situations. Given the laws of compound growth, even comparatively small reductions in fertility over the next decade will make a significant difference in total numbers by the year 2000, and a far more significant one by the year 2050.”

Could this be why world governments continue to authorize the use of banned and dangerous vaccines and chemicals in developing countries, even though there are other far safer products available?

Lies, Lies and More Lies

In 2012, Neetu Vashisht and Jacob Puliye published a paper in the Indian Journal of Medical Ethics titled Polio programme: let us declare victory and move on. Throughout their paper, they make it abundantly clear that polio is here to stay and that cases of vaccine-induced polio are reaching an all-time high. They wrote:

“It was hoped that following polio eradication, immunisation could be stopped. However the synthesis of polio virus in 2002, made eradication impossible. It is argued that getting poor countries to expend their scarce resources on an impossible dream over the last 10 years was unethical.

Furthermore, while India has been polio-free for a year, there has been a huge increase in non-polio acute flaccid paralysis (NPAFP). In 2011, there were an extra 47,500 new cases of NPAFP. Clinically indistinguishable from polio paralysis but twice as deadly, the incidence of NPAFP was directly proportional to doses of oral polio received. Though this data was collected within the polio surveillance system, it was not investigated. The principle of primum-non-nocere was violated.”

In other words, the oral polio vaccine is believed to be directly responsible for NPAFPs and, according to their paper, the eradication of polio is impossible for the following reasons:

“The charade about polio eradication and the great savings it will bring has persisted to date. It is a paradox, that while the director general of WHO, Margret Chan, and Bill Gates are trying to muster support for polio eradication, it has been known to the scientific community, for over 10 years, that eradication of polio is impossible. This is because in 2002 scientists had synthesised a chemical called poliovirus in a test-tube with the empirical formula C332, 652H492, 388N98, 245O131, 196P7, 501S2, 340. It has been demonstrated that by positioning the atoms in sequence, a particle can emerge with all the properties required for its proliferation and survival in nature. Wimmer writes that the test-tube synthesis of poliovirus has wiped out any possibility of eradicating poliovirus in the future. Poliovirus cannot be declared extinct because the sequence of its genome is known and modern biotechnology allows it to be resurrected at any time in vitro. Man can thus never let down his guard against poliovirus. Indeed the 18-year-old global eradication campaign for polioviruses will have to be continued in some format forever. The long promised “infinite” monetary benefits from ceasing to vaccinate against poliovirus will never be achieved.”

The fact that we are being lied to is even more disturbing when you consider their data identifies that the children who contract NPAFP are twice as likely to die of their debilitating illness as from the wild polio virus.

Whilst many professionals believe that vaccines are to blame for the dramatic rise in NPAFP, others believe that vaccines are not the only problem.

See:

The Polio Vaccine Continues to Spread Polio and Harm People in Poor Countries.

However, if vaccines are not solely to blame, what is?

Could DDT be Causing Thousands of Children to Become Paralyzed?

Dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane (DDT) was one of the first chemicals to be used as a pesticide worldwide and it was promoted as a wonder-chemical following World War II.

In 1972, the chemical was allegedly banned from agricultural use because it was found to cause the following long-term health problems:

• Probable human carcinogen 

• Damages the liver 

• Temporarily damages the nervous system 

• Reduces reproductive success 

• Can cause liver cancer 

• Damages reproductive system 

See:

Persistent Bioaccumulative and Toxic (PBT) Chemical Program.

However, although a ban of DDT was announced by the U.S. Environmental Agency and many other leading organizations, in reality a ban never actually took place, as DDT is still used in the pesticide Dicofol and in the war against malaria,

The WHO state:

“15 September 2006 | Washington, D.C. – Nearly thirty years after phasing out the widespread use of indoor spraying with DDT and other insecticides to control malaria, the World Health Organization (WHO) today announced that this intervention will once again play a major role in its efforts to fight the disease. WHO is now recommending the use of indoor residual spraying (IRS) not only in epidemic areas but also in areas with constant and high malaria transmission, including throughout Africa.”

DDT Used to Combat Polio before the Vaccine

Before the polio vaccine became widely available; DDT was sprayed throughout cities to prevent civilians from becoming infected with the virus. This was because it was believed that insects were spreading the polio virus and that spraying DDT directly on to the public would kill the insects and eradicate polio.

However, far from eradicating the illness as predicated, the continual spraying of a chemical known to cause spinal damage in animals appeared to increase the problem. This increase corresponded directly to the spraying of DDT.

In an opinion article written by Marcus Caceres titled DDT and the Rise and Fall of Polio, he wrote:

“As the DDT campaign proceeded, the incidence of polio began to sharply rise in the U.S. The number of reported cases of polio in the country in 1946 hit 25,191—nearly twice the number as in the previous year. In 1947, the number of cases dropped to 10,737 (580 deaths), but then rose again to 27,680 (2,140 deaths) in 1948.

The number of cases remained high during 1949-1951, with a total of 103,719, or an annual average of 34,573. 

In 1952, the number of polio cases peaked at 52,879, and then began to decline to 35,592 in 1953, 38,476 in 1954 and 28,985 in 1955. The rates of polio were already well on a downward trend by the time the Salk vaccine was licensed in 1955 and began to be used on a mass scale.” (own emphasis)

Mr. Caceres explained that after finding that the product was clearly increasing the incidence of polio, the U.S. government devised a cunning plan.

He wrote:

“Interestingly, DDT fumigation in the U.S. had reached its peak in 1951. In 1952, the fumigations were subsiding. In 1953, polio cases were also subsiding at about the same rate. By 1953, the number of polio cases had dropped by nearly 40%. After 1954, even though DDT was still produced in the U.S., the distribution of the chemical shifted to developing countries. Large quantities of DDT began to be bought by the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) and the United Nations (UN) and exported.” (own emphasis)

In other words, despite the fact that the U.S. government knew that the use of this chemical was dangerous and it had been proven to increase the incidence of polio, instead of banning the use of DDT worldwide, they decided to ship large quantities of the product to developing countries.

Their Decision Was Devastating

In August 2015, Kenneth Paul Stoller, M.D., published a paper in the International Journal of Current Advanced Research titled AD, AFP, ALS, and DDT.  It is his belief that pesticides containing DDT are causing tens of thousands of children to become paralyzed. He wrote:

“There is a disturbing fixation on a single virus, the poliovirus, being the cause of the disease Polio, Meanwhile tens of thousands of cases of non-poliovirus Acute Flaccid Paralysis (AFP) are on the rise. The poliovirus is but one of many types of enterovirus that will cause paralysis in the presence of the appropriate toxic co-factors. The evidence that organochlorine pesticides are co-factors in multiple neurological disorders, not just AFP, is unequivocal. Pesticides are implicated in diseases such as Alzheimer’s, Parkinson’s disease and amyotrophic lateral sclerosis. There is more than one family of pesticides causing toxicity problems for humans, but DDT use is a big offender, but not as big as our myopic blindness to the actual etiology and pathology of the many neurological disorders that plague us. It is simply beyond reason as it could jeopardize the survival of the human race.”

In his no nonsense, well-researched paper, Dr. Stoller continued by adding this chilling message:

“Again, this bears repeating: if we are to believe the researchers from Rutgers, DDT and DDE are directly linked to Alzheimer’s disease not an association, not some vague possible causality, a direct link. Therefore, the conscious use of anything with DDT and DDE in it would be the deliberate use of a substance to cause harm for greed. There are, after all, substitutes to these insecticides, so using deadly insecticides that don’t degrade, when there are substitutes is the purposeful and wilful act of harm to humanity and life on this planet.” (own emphasis)

Dr. Stoller also explained that as cases of polio in India decreased, cases of AFP increased. On page 266, he wrote:

“India, which manufactures and uses the most DDT, was declared free of polio in 2011, but cases of AFP have skyrocketed. The Ministry of Health & Family Welfare (MoHFW) made a big announcement in June of 2015 that, ‘India is polio-free.’ The country reported its last case of wild poliovirus in 2011. After three consecutive polio-free years, the South-East Asia Region of WHO, comprising of 11 countries (including India), was certified polio-free on 27 March 2014. Despite this progress, India has maintained a high vigil and ensured that no complacency sets in order to maintain the polio-free status for the last more than 4 years. It has taken appropriate actions to ensure high population immunity against polio as well as for maintaining a sensitive surveillance system for poliovirus detection.

It seems the poliovirus is the goal of eradication – not the disease of “polio” itself (AFP). The 53,000 cases per year of AFP are not from the poliovirus, but it is still polio. Polio is a type of AFP. More than the poliovirus can cause AFP. It is called non-polio acute flaccid paralysis(NPAFP). Yet no one seems to be too bothered by the rising NPAFP numbers or why they are even there – just a big mystery? If there is no effort to identify the EVs causing NPAFP, or learn why humans are vulnerable to them, the eradication of the poliovirus is all subterfuge.”

This paper is certainly food for thought, especially when you consider the fact that all of the conditions Dr. Stoller outlined as being caused by DDT have also been linked to adverse reactions to vaccinations.

DDT +Vaccines = Trouble

It is an established fact that children can develop vaccine-associated paralytic poliomyelitis (VAPP) as a serious side effect of the oral polio vaccine. This has been admitted by both the WHO (World Health Organization) and the CDC (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention).

See CDC’s paper, Update: Vaccine Side Effects, Adverse Reactions, Contraindications, and Precautions Recommendations of the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices, published in 1996 and the WHO’s paper, Information Sheet Observed Rate of Vaccine Reactions – Polio Vaccines, published in 2014.

Although both papers have demonstrated there is a problem, both the CDC and the WHO have stated that cases of vaccine-associated poliomyelitis are extremely rare. However, many professionals disagree and have stated that the numbers of cases being reported are on the rise.

In 2012, retired scientist Dr. Viera Scheibner wrote an article published in the British Medical Journal titled Polio eradication: a complex end game, in which she explained the true horrors of the situation. She wrote:

“It comes as no surprise that the most recent mass polio vaccination programs fuelled by Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation resulted in increased cases of VAPP. In India, two paediatricians, Dr Neetu Vashisht and Dr Jacob Pulliel of the Department of Paediatrics of St. Stephens Hospital in Delhi noted that another major ethical issue raised by the campaign is the failure to thoroughly investigate the increase in incidence ‘of non-polio acute flaccid paralysis (NPAFP)’ in areas where many doses of vaccine were used, while noting that these cases are clinically indistinguishable from polio paralysis and twice as deadly.

They also noted that while India was declared polio-free in 2011, at the same time there were 47500 cases of NPAFP, which increased in direct proportion to the number of polio vaccine doses received. Independent studies showed that children identified with NPAFP ‘were at more than twice the risk of dying than those with wild polio infection.’

According to their report, nationally, the NPAFP rate is now twelve times higher than expected. In the states of Uttar Pradesh and Bihar – which have pulse polio vaccination every month – the NPAFP rate is 25 and 35 fold higher than the international norms (Ramesh Shankar, Mumbai 2012).”

With the number of cases on the rise each year, these figures highlight that NPAFP is more than an “extremely rare” adverse reaction as indicated by the CDC and WHO.

Vaccines, DDT or a Combination of Both?

It is an established fact that DDT can cause severe adverse reactions when used in large quantities, and according to Dr. Stoller, this is exactly what is happening in developing countries. He wrote:

“Think about 10 million pounds of DDT being sprayed in Africa per year alone (Subramaniam et al., 2014), and it makes those populations prone to both poliovirus-facilitated Acquired Flaccid Paralysis (AFP), as well as non-polio enterovirus  AFP. Ethiopia, South Africa, India, Mauritius, Myanmar, Yemen, Uganda, Mozambique, Swaziland, Zimbabwe, North Korea, Eritrea, Gambia, Namibia, and Zambia are all using DDT (not just dicofol, but straight DDT). Who benefits if we all believe polio is just about a virus – a single virus?

The family of viruses that causes AFP belongs to the enterovirus (EV) family, but the immune system has to be compromised for them to wreck havoc on the nervous system; otherwise, they just remain a relatively benign family of viruses. Consider the possibility that the infamous “polio” epidemic was a man-made environmental catastrophe where a relatively benign family of viruses opportunistically took advantage of those with a compromised immune system because their bodies were sub-clinically poisoned with pesticides.” (own emphasis.)

His words make uncomfortable reading, especially since the WHO has stated:

“The onset of symptoms with VAPP usually occurs 4–30 days following receipt of oral polio vaccine (OPV) or within 4–75 days after contact with a recipient of OPV. In immunodeficient individuals (especially those with low antibody – hypogammaglobulinemia) VAPP may occur outside these windows.”

See WHO’s Information Sheet Observed Rate of Vaccine Reactions – Polio Vaccines.

This is especially worrying when you learn that the World Resources Institute stated the following information when discussing a wide range of pesticides, including those containing DDT:

“In real populations, whether animal or human, the individuals most likely to suffer health consequences are those whose immune systems are weak because they are very young, aged, pregnant, sick, or malnourished (Luster, 1993a; NRC, 1993; IPCS, 1986).”

See World Resources Institute – Pesticides and the Immune System: The Public Health Risks and Global Health Center – Pesticides and the Immune System Overview.

Despite knowing these well-documented facts, however, world governments continue to allow both of these products to be used throughout the developing world.

Therefore, we refer to our original question: Could population control be why world governments continue to authorize the use of banned and dangerous vaccines and chemicals in developing countries?