Just this week, the New York Times published an article stating that the problem of surging whooping cough cases has more to do with flaws in the current vaccines than with parents' resistance. Could the truth about vaccines finally be going mainstream?
In older adults, is vaccination against herpes zoster effective and safe? A Cochrane Review stated that the herpes zoster (shingles) vaccine has demonstrated effectiveness in preventing shingles in older adults, yet if you look at the actual numbers, you will see that in those aged 60-69, the shingles vaccine was ineffective for 98% (forty-nine out of fifty) of those studied. For those aged 70 and older, the vaccine was 99% ineffective, since 99 out of 100 received no benefit. In addition, when looking at the adverse effect risk of this vaccine, you will find that for every 2.8 vaccines given, one patient was harmed. Furthermore, for every one hundred subjects vaccinated, one had a severe adverse reaction such as rash, fever, or hospitalization. I am incredulous that anyone looking at this data could proclaim that the shingles vaccine was effective. In fact, it wasn’t. According to this data, the shingles vaccine was a 98-99% failure.
In spite of the fact that there have been no cases of polio in the Philippines since 1993, WHO and UNICEF are taking advantage of the typhoon tragedy to spread their vaccine program into the Philippines, administering the highly controversial and dangerous oral live attenuated polio vaccine, which is no longer used in the U.S., but is still common in poorer countries. 30,000 children have already been vaccinated in an extraordinary effort in the typhoon aftermath, and 500,000 children under the age of five are targeted for the live polio vaccine and the measles vaccine. Will the Philippines now be added to the list of countries where UNICEF works that sees an increase in infant mortality under the age of five? How many Filipino children will now be sacrificed for the vaccine cause, in a country that has no polio and where measles has been declining and is rare?
A 19-year old who received a flu shot during a routine physical became violently ill, suffering from vomiting and headaches, eventually slipping into a coma and then succumbing to his injuries. While his mother is claiming that the influenza vaccine is responsible for the death of her son, doctors claim they could not confirm the cause and they are now legally prohibited from speaking about his case. Mrs. Webb says this was her son's first ever flu shot. He had received it the day before he became ill as part of a routine physical.
My name is Jennifer Guldin and I am 27 years old. Gardasil has impacted the lives of everyone I care about. I am unique from a lot of the girls that have been injured by Gardasil, because I did not receive the vaccine until I was 25 years old. I was already happily married and had a beautiful 3-year old daughter, prior to receiving the Gardasil vaccination. Gardasil has not only affected me, but it has also affected my loved ones who have had to witness me suffer on a daily basis for the last two years. I truly believe it has been equally difficult for them, just in a different way. In high school I was very active. After graduating high school, I went on to college where I met the love of my life, Dustin. We were married in July of 2007 and God then blessed us with a beautiful and amazing little girl in August of 2008. Life was near perfect in my eyes! Other than two knee surgeries, from previous cheerleading injuries, and being fatigued as a new mother, I was in very good health. This all changed in September of 2011, when I visited my OB/GYN for my annual pap smear and was approached about the Gardasil vaccination. The nurse explained to me that Gardasil was to prevent against a sexually transmitted disease, HPV, and that there were absolutely no side effects. I told her that I was happily married and was not concerned about sexually transmitted diseases. She threw the words “cancer prevention” out there! After taking into consideration that my mom had breast cancer not too long ago and that it would probably be silly for me to pass up something that could protect me from going through what she did, I reluctantly agreed to get the Gardasil vaccine. That single moment has negatively impacted the past two years of my life and quite possibly may affect the rest of my life.
In September, the following headline appeared in the UK Daily Mail, “Grandmother, 55, died from cervical cancer after her GP dismissed her symptoms as the MENOPAUSE.” This woman knew something was wrong, visited her doctor multiple times, and had her symptoms blamed on age (menopause), instead of being run through normal diagnostic procedures which would have detected her cancer when it was still curable. What would have most likely prevented her untimely death? A reliable HPV detection method that included genotyping and regular Pap smears. However, policy makers at the NCI have not made these options readily available to medical consumers. Policy makers have left women with no choice but to educate themselves, demand the reliable test procedures they need and refuse those options which provide little benefit and substantial risk. Women must stop allowing themselves to be manipulated by the news media and industry-paid consultants, whether they are in the government or the academic world. You have a choice – medical consumer or medical subject?
It is a well established fact in the United States that the pharmaceutical company's vaccine products cannot survive in a free market. Facing complete financial ruin due to extensive litigation resulting in faulty products which were maiming and killing people in the 1980s, the industry sought and was granted legal protection from all lawsuits by Congress in 1986. This law was challenged but upheld by the U.S. Supreme Court in 2011. Without this legal protection that no other product in the U.S. market enjoys, we would have far fewer vaccines in the market today, but the vaccines that would have survived the normal free market pressures would also be far safer. So like many other government subsidized products in the market, a huge "financial vaccine bubble" has formed over the past few years - a very costly bubble in more ways than one. However, even with this legal protection, vaccine sales are continuing to slump as the true danger and toxicity of vaccines is becoming more widely understood, even with an almost complete ban on covering the dangerous side effects of vaccines in the mainstream media, which is quickly losing credibility. The financial vaccine bubble may be poised to burst, as countries outside the U.S. are beginning to question the safety of certain vaccines in the market place, such as Gardasil. Thanks to the power of the Internet and the new alternative media, facts about the true danger of vaccines are becoming well-known, where in the past they may have been concealed from the public. The Elizabeth Birt Center for Autism Law & Advocacy group published a report earlier this year explaining that the U.S. government has paid out more than $2 billion in vaccine injury compensation in over 2500 claims since the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program was implemented in 1988 to replace the legal system in hearing and trying vaccine injury cases. That is $2 billion in taxpayer money that in a free market judicial system would have been paid by the vaccine manufacturers (and probably a whole lot more than that!), but who get to continue dumping new vaccines into the market place with virtually no risk. So what's next in the government and pharmaceutical's effort to keep the financial vaccine bubble inflated? If people are waking up to the facts of the dangers of vaccines and increasingly refusing them, then mandatory forced vaccinations is the only course left open, and what better way to maximize expenditure and profit than to use an aerial spraying delivery system on a non-compliant public who no longer wants these products.
An eye-opening new study published in the Journal of Viral Hepatitis reveals that conventional hepatitis B vaccine, and hepatitis B immunoglobulin-based treatment for infants of mothers who tested positive for hepatitis B infection, is nothing near "95% effective in preventing infection and its chronic consequences" that the World Health Organization (WHO) and a myriad of health organizations around the world claim it to be. To the contrary, researchers were able to detect through highly sensitive polymerase chain reaction (PCR) DNA testing that 42% of the infants still had 'occult' hepatitis B infection, 24 months after initiating treatment at birth, despite the fact that the vaccine reduced the incidence of overt infection. In the researchers' own words: "The results of this large prospective longitudinal study show that 42% of babies born of HBsAg-positive mothers develop occult HBV infection, which is not prevented by administration of recombinant HBV vaccine to the newborn." This study not only clearly calls into question the standard of care for preventing hepatitis B infection in infants born to infected mothers, but it also challenges core tenets of vaccinology, including hepatitis B vaccine safety and effectiveness.
Medical history books, almost uniformly extol the virtues of vaccination. Upon reading these books, one is left with the impression that during the 1800s and into the 1900s, there were rampant plagues that killed countless scores of people and that, because of vaccines, this is no longer the case. This is certainly what we believed growing up, and most people we talk to have a similar impression. It generally permeates society as an established fact. The problem with these statements is that they are not supported by the evidence.
Dr. Sherri Tenpenny shares some facts regarding the meningitis "outbreak" at Princeton University, and the dangers associated with the unapproved vaccine that is being proposed to be tested on students. With only 7 cases of meningitis in 9 months at Princeton, is this simply a marketing ploy by vaccine manufacturer Novartis to get their vaccine into the billion dollar U.S. vaccine market, at the expense of using Princeton University students as unsuspecting drug trial participants?
