Search this site

Bio-Terror Agents

    VACCINES‎ > ‎

    Vaccines as Bio-Weapons

    BIOTERRORBIBLE.COM: If and when a full-scale bio-terror attack occurs, the live pathogens or agents responsible for the pandemic will likely be dispersed via A) chemtrails by government airplanes and/or drones, B) by the U.S. Postal Service via Tide detergent samples, C) by the government and medical establishment via tainted vaccines, or by D) the portable petri dish commonly known as the Trojan condom.

    A wealth of recent medical research indicates that vaccines are no longer safe and may cause serious neurological problems, seizures, autism and even death. A recent push by the medical and government establishment in America to make vaccines mandatory may go into effect after a pandemic in which martial military law will be called and personal freedoms like the right to refuse a vaccine will be denied.


    In a major bio-terror related pandemic, it will be the tainted vaccines which are ultimately responsible for killing 99% of the victims.

    Title: Politicizing Vaccines
    Date:
    November 18, 2002

    Source:
    UCLA

    Abstract: The production of vaccines against bioterrorism hardly seems like a partisan idea. But all of sudden it's emerged as a hot political controversy, as Democrats object to an effort to offer liability protection for companies that could protect Americans from smallpox or the West Nile virus.

    We're delighted they brought it up. The state of the U.S. vaccine industry has been a national scandal for years, with needless shortages not just to immunize against bioterror threats but even against such routine childhood diseases as tetanus and whooping cough. The latest threat comes from a proliferation of lawsuits that enrich the tort bar but make vaccine production a masochistic exercise.

    Democrats are protesting now because Republicans are trying to insert some liability protection for vaccine makers as part of the new homeland security legislation. "Leave it to the Republicans to sneak in a proposal that protects manufacturers of the vaccine, doctors and nurses and leaves the person who may be injured -- even by negligent action -- to bear the whole burden of their injury," declared Henry Waxman, the California Democrat. This sure sounds terrible, if it were only true.

    The real story here is about thimerosal, a mercury-based preservative that vaccine makers once used. Though there was no evidence that thimerosal caused neurological disorders or other harm, the Clinton Administration recommended that companies stop using it -- and the tort follies began.

    As of June lawyers had hit vaccine makers with 68 thimerosal lawsuits, 11 of them class actions. One in Florida is claiming as many as 175 million victims. Another is said to be asking for $30 billion in damages; the entire vaccine industry is only worth about $6 billion in global revenue.

    Congress has already tried to stop this kind of thing once. In the mid-1980s plaintiffs' suits had driven all but three companies out of the vaccine business. Congress responded by creating the Vaccine Injury Compensation Program. VICP set up a no-fault alternative to the tort system, which would compensate families for the rare, but inevitable, side effects of government-recommended vaccines.

    Parents could still sue in court, but only after they first went through VICP -- which was designed to be quick, generous and require lower burdens of proof. Since 1986 the government has awarded some $1.3 billion in compensation to more than 1,700 families. Vaccine makers and health providers received liability protection to stabilize the industry, and families received just compensation. Few went on to sue.

    The only unhappy party was the tort bar, which has tried to get around the legislation ever since. The government's thimerosal recommendation was their opening. Some of today's suits claim thimerosal is a "contaminant" and thus doesn't fall under VICP's side effects. Others are suing not the vaccine manufacturers covered under VICP, but the companies that made the preservative. And since VICP only covers claims of more than $1,000, lawyers are aggregating claims of under $999.

    If these lawsuits are allowed to proceed, forget about a stable supply of vaccines. As it is today, only four major vaccine companies supply preventive medicines against such diseases as whooping cough or measles. Most manufacturers have been driven out by skyrocketing regulatory costs and a government that uses its monopoly buying clout to pay a minimum for products.

    In sum, the GOP liability effort is an essential part of homeland security that will save lives. Republican Bill Frist has been pushing this legal protection with the support of the federal Advisory Commission on Childhood Vaccines, the American Academy of Pediatrics and the physicians' community. Mr. Waxman and his Senate allies (Joe Lieberman intends to offer an amendment this week stripping out the Dick Armey provision that passed the House) have the trial lawyers' lobby. Americans can figure out who is really playing politics with vaccines (UCLA, 2002).

    Title:
    Compensating A Must For Vaccine Injuries
    Date:
    November 25, 2002
    Source:
    UCLA

    Abstract:

    In reaction to your Nov. 18 editorial "Politicizing Vaccines":

    The homeland security bill contains several liability protection provisions. One provision concerns the smallpox vaccine. It limits the liability of manufacturers and health-care providers for injuries caused by this vaccine -- but does nothing to compensate the Americans who we know will be injured by the vaccine. This omission is inexcusable, and I stand by my comment that Republicans have protected everyone but the people who need protection the most.

    Your editorial, however, took my comment on the smallpox liability program and applied it to an entirely unrelated provision in the homeland security bill. This second provision provides new liability protection for makers of thimerosal, a preservative that was previously used in some childhood vaccines. You accuse me of opposing this provision in order to foster litigation. You then approvingly cite the Vaccine Injury Compensation Program, a government initiative that provides compensation outside of the tort system for children injured by vaccines.

    In fact, I authored the legislation creating the Vaccine Injury Compensation Program. My belief that we should apply this successful model to smallpox vaccine is exactly why I am so disappointed that the homeland security bill does nothing to compensate those injured by the vaccine.

    I oppose the thimerosal provisions because they have nothing to do with homeland security and do not belong in the bill. There was no debate on these provisions and virtually no House members even knew they were in the bill. When Congress approves provisions of this import, it should be by a deliberative process and not by the legislative fiat of one member who refuses even to acknowledge responsibility for these provisions.

    These liability protections should be considered in separate legislation along with many other changes to the childhood vaccine program also recommended by the independent HHS advisory panel that oversees this program.

    Rep. Henry A. Waxman (D., Calif.)

    Ranking Minority Member

    Committee on Government Reform

    Washington (UCLA, 2002).

    Title: Serious Side Effects, Deaths Likely From Vaccine
    Date: December 12, 2002
    Source:
    UCLA

    Abstract: The decision to begin widespread vaccination for smallpox, starting with 500,000 military personnel and an equal number of "first-responder" health-care workers, will probably cause a few hundred serious adverse reactions and perhaps some deaths — a dark side of vaccination unseen in the world for 25 years.

    Most people tolerate the smallpox vaccine with only minor effects, such as fever and body aches. But a survey of those inoculated in 1968 found about 1 person per million died of the vaccine's side effects, and as many as 52 of every million people suffered life-threatening reactions, including fever, serious infections and brain swelling.

    The side effects are viewed by most public health experts as an acceptable trade-off against smallpox itself, which kills about 30% of its victims. And according to a national survey released Wednesday, most Americans agree. In the poll conducted for the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation, 65% of respondents said they would take the smallpox vaccine — up from 59% polled in May. Only 22% said they would refuse the vaccine, down from 33% in May. However, pollsters did not offer details about the vaccine's risks.
    For three millenniums before its eradication, smallpox regularly ravaged nations across the globe, killing millions with high fevers and an excruciating blanket of erupting pustules across the entire body, including the palms, eyelids and inside the nostrils. Survivors were often left with horrific scars as a lifelong reminder.

    The last known case of smallpox occurred in Somalia in 1977. After a global vaccination campaign, the disease — caused by the variola virus — was declared eradicated in 1980. In this country, routine smallpox vaccination was ended in 1972, meaning that most people who were inoculated before that time have long since lost their immunity to the disease and would need to be reinoculated. Today's vaccine is derived from stockpiles frozen for decades.

    Produced From Calves

    The smallpox vaccine is made from vaccinia, a virus related to the variola virus but far less dangerous. The vaccine is mass-produced in cultures of lymph cells from calves.

    Vaccination involves dipping a two-pronged needle into the vaccine, then using it to make 30 shallow skin punctures on the upper arm. In most cases this causes a red, itchy bump that eventually forms a pus-filled blister that heals in about three weeks.

    The inoculation gives full immunity for three to five years but gradually wears off over the next decade, according to the federal Centers for Disease Control and Prevention in Atlanta.

    Among the most serious side effects of the vaccine is a skin infection known as progressive vaccinia. The disease, which kills tissue around the vaccination site and can spread to other parts of the body, affects 1 to 2 people per 1 million vaccinations.

    A more common but still serious reaction is a similar skin infection known as eczema vaccinatum. The infection causes a painful rash across the body and can be fatal. The problem occurs in about 39 cases out of every 1 million vaccinations.

    Other Side Effects

    Another serious side effect is post-vaccinial encephalitis, an infection that swells the brain, causing headaches, vomiting, high fevers and, in rare cases, paralysis and death. It affects about 12 people per 1 million vaccinations.

    In addition to these side effects, the 1968 study found that about 935 of every 1 million first-time vaccinations result in serious but not life-threatening infections — particularly on the face, eyelids or genitals.

    All of these side effects are less common among people who were previously vaccinated for smallpox. Virtually no Americans under the age of 25 — about 97 million people born after the date of eradication — have been vaccinated.

    Some of the side effects, including eczema vaccinatum, progressive vaccinia and the less serious generalized vaccinia, can be treated with vaccinia immune globulin — a vaccine derived from the antibody-rich blood plasma of recently inoculated donors. It must be injected into muscle tissue. Severe cases can require massive doses — as much as a liter injected into multiple muscles for a 220-pound person. Only 700 doses of vaccinia immune globulin are available, enough to treat cases expected from no more than 6 million vaccinations, according to the CDC.

    Reserves Sought

    Researchers are working to expand that supply within a few months, using a new vaccinia immune globulin formulation that can be administered intravenously in much lower doses. The antiviral drug cidofovir has also shown experimental promise for treating vaccinia infections, but it would be used only when vaccinia immune globulin is not available.

    Individuals who have ever been diagnosed with eczema or who currently suffer from immune deficiency diseases, such as AIDS or certain cancers, including lymphoma and leukemia, should avoid vaccination. Pregnant women, small children and anyone taking medications that suppress the immune system also should not be vaccinated — and should shun direct contact with anyone healing from a recent vaccination.

    "After someone has received the vaccine, for a period of time they are suffering from a viral infection," said Steven Block, a Stanford University biologist and an advisor to the government on biological warfare defenses.

    "At that point, they can give the live virus to someone who is immune-compromised and who was never given the vaccination at all."

    About 500 such incidental infections, often to sensitive parts of the body, such as the eyes, would probably occur per 1 million inoculations, the 1968 survey suggests.

    However, anyone who has been exposed to smallpox, regardless of their risk profile, should be vaccinated — the dangers of the disease invariably outweigh those of the vaccine. Even a few days after exposure to smallpox, the vaccine confers a degree of immunity.

    In the current vaccination campaign, complications might be more rare than previous studies showed. The relatively healthy and young military population is thought to be less susceptible to serious side effects than the general population. Experts add that careful screening will help lower the risks as well.

    But Margaret Hamburg, a biological warfare expert and former New York City commissioner for public health, said there is a possibility that the rate of adverse reactions could be higher than in 1968. Immune-deficiency ailments are more common now.

    Different Than in '68

    And unlike today, many of those receiving the vaccine in 1968 had previously been in contact with family members or others who had recently been inoculated. Such casual exposure, even when it does not cause a vaccinia infection, can help the body fight off the vaccine's side effects, she said.

    "The absolutely critical thing is that we need to carefully collect information of the adverse consequences of the vaccination as we move forward" in order to plan for widespread vaccination programs, Hamburg said.

    After smallpox was eradicated, most stocks were destroyed.

    By international agreement, only small quantities for research were to be retained, and only by the Soviet Union and the U.S. in highly secure labs.

    Revelations that the Soviets, and later the Russians in the post-Soviet era, manufactured and maintained massive smallpox stocks in violation of the Biological Weapons Convention came to light in the 1990s.

    Samples of the virus are thought to have been obtained by Iraq and other nations suspected of maintaining illegal biological weapon programs, and may even be in the hands of terrorists — leading to the sense of urgency about the current vaccination campaigs (UCLA, 2002).

    Title: Smallpox Shots: Make Them Mandatory
    Date: December 23, 2002
    Source:
    TIME

    Abstract: The eradication of smallpox was one of humanity's great success stories. After thousands of years of suffering at the hands of the virus, the human race gathered all its wit and cunning and conquered the scourge, eradicating it forever. Well, forever lasted less than 25 years. It does not bode well for the future of our species that it took but a blink of the eye for one of history's worst killers to make a comeback — not on its own, mind you, but brought back by humans to kill again.

    During the age of innocence — the '90s, during which it seemed history had ended — the big debate was whether the two remaining known stocks of smallpox in the world, one in Russia and the other in the U.S., should be destroyed. It seemed like a wonderful idea, except that no one could be absolutely sure that some smallpox stores had not fallen into other hands. In fact, we now think Iraq is working on weaponizing smallpox, and perhaps North Korea and others too.

    The danger is greater now than ever — first, and ironically, because of our very success in eradicating it in the past. People today have almost no experience with, and therefore no immunity to, the virus. We are nearly as virgin a population as the Native Americans who were wiped out by the various deadly pathogens brought over by Europeans. Not content with that potential for mass murder, however, today's bad guys are reportedly trying to genetically manipulate the virus to make it even deadlier and more resistant to treatment. Who knows what monstrosities the monsters are brewing in their secret laboratories.

    What to do? We have enough vaccine on hand, some diluted but still effective, to vaccinate everyone in the U.S., with more full-strength versions to come. President Bush has just announced that his Administration will take the concentric-circle approach: mandatory inoculations for certain soldiers, voluntary inoculations for medical and emergency workers, and then inoculations available to, but discouraged for, everybody else.

    It sounds good, but it is not quite right. If smallpox were a threat just to individuals, then it could be left up to individuals to decide whether or not they want to protect themselves. When it comes to epidemic diseases, however, we don't leave it up to individuals to decide. The state decides.

    Forget about smallpox. This happens every day with childhood diseases. No child can go to school unless he's been immunized. Parents have no choice. Think of it: we force parents to inject healthy children with organisms — some living, some dead — that in a small number of cases will cripple or kill the child. It is an extraordinary violation of the privacy and bodily integrity of the little citizen. Yet it is routine. Why? Because what is at stake is the vulnerability of the entire society to catastrophic epidemic. In that case, individuals must submit.

    Which is why smallpox vaccines were mandatory when we were kids. It wasn't left up to you to decide if you wanted it. You might be ready to risk your life by forgoing the vaccine, but society would not let you — not because it was saving you from yourself but because it had to save others from you. The problem wasn't you getting smallpox; the problem was you giving smallpox to others if you got it. Society cannot tolerate that. We forced vaccination even though we knew it would maim and kill a small but certain number of those subjected to it.

    Today the case for mandatory vaccination is even stronger. This is war. We need to respond as in war. The threat is not just against individuals, but against the nation. Smallpox kills a third of its victims. If this epidemic were to take hold, it could devastate America as a functioning society. And the government's highest calling is to protect society — a calling even higher than protecting individuals.

    That is why conscription in wartime is justified. We violate the freedom of individuals by drafting them into combat, risking their lives — suspending, in effect, their right to life and liberty, to say nothing of the pursuit of happiness — in the name of the nation.

    Vaccination is the conscription of civilians in the war against bioterrorism. I personally would choose not to receive the smallpox vaccine. I would not have my family injected. I prefer the odds of getting the disease vs. the odds of inflicting injury or death by vaccination on my perfectly healthy child.

    Nonetheless, it should not be my decision. When what is at stake is the survival of the country, personal and family calculation must yield to national interest. And a population fully protected from smallpox is a supreme national interest.

    If it is determined that the enemy really has smallpox and might use it, we should vaccinate everyone. We haven't been called upon to do very much for the country since Sept. 11. We can and should do this (TIME, 2002).

    Title: Selected Vaccine Authorities From CDC, FDA, And Manufacturers Discuss, In A Closed Meeting, The Possibility Of Neurodevelopment Disorders Resulting From Vaccine Components.
    Date:
    2003
    Source:
    AAPS

    Abstract: The CDC published a study in late 2003, repudiating any possible link between thimerosal and developmental problems such as autism, but the CDC did have data supporting such a link which it secretively kept from the public.

    Documents released through the Freedom of Information Act detail the transcript of a meeting held in June of 2000 between members of the CDC, the FDA, and representatives from the vaccine industry.

    This top secret meeting was held to discuss a study done by Dr. Thomas Verstraeten and his co-workers using Vaccine Safety Datalink data as a project collaboration between the CDC's National Immunization Program (NIP) and four HMOs. The study examined the records of 110,000 children.

    The transcript is titled “Scientific Review of Vaccine Safety Datalink Information,” June 7-8, 2000, Simpsonwood Retreat Center, Norcross, Georgia, but it was also the first official meeting of the ACIP (Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices which sets CDC policy) work group on thimerosal and immunization. In attendance were Walter Orenstein, Director of the National Immunization Program (NIP) at the CDC; John Modlin, Chair of the ACIP and on the faculty at Dartmouth Medical School; and 50 other distinguished members of the government (11 consultants from the CDC), academia and the pharmaceutical industry. Vaccine industry representatives were: Harry Guess, M.D., Merck, Chief of Epidemiology; Jo White, M.D., North American Vaccine, Clinical Dev. & Research; Barbara Howe, M.D., Smith, Kline-Beecham, Clinical Research Group; Mike Blum, M.D., Wyeth, Safety and Surveillance for Vaccine Development.

    Although this conference is apparently concerned with the effects of mercury in the form of thimerosal on infant brain development, participants seemed to have limited knowledge about mercury. None of the well known experts were invited, such as Dr. Ascher from Bowman Grey School of Medicine or Dr. Boyd Haley, who has done extensive work on the toxic effects of low concentrations on the CNS.

    The conference followed a study that showed that mercury in vaccines may have caused neurodevelopment problems.

    The following are in context excerpts of this 260 page transcript:

    Dr. Orenstein pg 1-2 “(For) those who don’t know, initial concerns were raised last summer that mercury, as methylmercury (thimerosal) in vaccines, might exceed safe levels. As a result of these concerns, CDC undertook, in collaboration with investigators in the Vaccine safety Datalink, an effort to evaluate whether there were any health risks from mercury on any of these vaccines. Analysis to date raise some concerns of possible dose-response effect of increasing levels of mehylmercury in vaccines and certain neurologic diagnosis. Therefore, the purpose of this meeting is to have a careful scientific review of the data.”

    Dr. Bernier pg 8 : (Associate Director for Science in the NIP) “There was a Congressional Action in 1997 requiring the FDA to review Mercury in drugs and biologics…in October of 1999 the ACIP looked this situation over again and… said the vaccines could be continued to be used.”

    Dr. Johnston, pg. 14-15 & 19-20: (Chair of the meeting and a pediatrician-immunologist at the University of Colorado): “Thimerosal is cleaved (in the body) into ethylmercury and thiosalicylate which is inactive… The data on its toxicity (shows) it can cause neurologic and renal toxicity, including death.”

    “It is particularly a concern in multi-dose vials because of the issue of re-entry multiple times in the vials, and it is also important in the manufacturing process for a number of vaccine including inactivated influenza and some of the earlier DPT vaccine, and is a constituent of all DPT vaccines, but not all DTAP vaccines.”

    “There are three licensed preservative in the United States, Thimerosal, ethyl and phenol. We won't talk about the other two today, but I thought I should mention them. Thimerosal is the most active and it has been utilized in vaccines since the 1930's.”

    “Acutely, it can cause neurologic and renal toxicity, including death, from overdose…”

    “Dr. Halsey made a very impassioned plea that we do carefully controlled studies to in fact address the issues specifically, and that such studies be conducted by neurodevelopmentalists and environmental scientists employing specific endpoints of their study…”

    “We just recently had another meeting that some of you were able to attend dealing with aluminum in vaccines. I would like to just say one or two words about that before I conclude.”

    “We learned at that meeting a number of important things about aluminum, and I think they also are important in our considerations today. “Aluminum salts are important in the formulating process of vaccines, both in antigen stabilization and absorption of endotoxin.”

    “Aluminum and mercury are often simultaneously administered to infants, both at the same site and at different sites.”

    “However, we also learned that there is absolutely no data, including animal data, about the potential for synergy, additively or antagonism, all of which can occur in binary metal mixtures that relate and allow us to draw any conclusions from the simultaneous exposure to these two salts in vaccines…”

    Dr. Weil, pg. 24: “I think it’s clear to me anyway that we are talking about a problem that is probably more related to bolus acute exposures, and we also need to know that the migration problems and some of the other developmental problems in the central nervous system go on for quite a period after birth. But from all of the other studies of toxic substances, the earlier you work with the central nervous system, the more likely you are to run into a sensitive period for one of these effects, so that moving from one month or one day of birth to six months of birth changes enormously the potential for toxicity. There are just a host of neurodevelopmental data that would suggest that we’ve got a serious problem. The earlier we go, the more serious the problem.”

    “The second point I could make is that in relationship to aluminum, being a nephrologist for a long time, the potential for aluminum and central nervous system toxicity was established by dialysis data. To think there isn’t some possible problem here is unreal.”

    Dr. Verstraeten, pg. 31: “It is sort of interesting that when I first came to the CDC as a NIS officer a year ago only, I didn’t really know what I wanted to do, but one of the things I knew I didn’t want to do was studies that had to do with toxicology or environmental health. Now it turns out that other people also thought that this study was not the right thing to do, so what I will present to you is the study that nobody thought we should do.”

    Dr. Verstraeten, pg. 40: “…we have found statistically significant relationships between the exposure and outcomes for these different exposures and outcomes. First, for two months of age, an unspecified developmental delay, which has its own specific ICD9 code. Exposure at three months of age, Tics. Exposure at six months of age, an attention deficit disorder. Exposure at one, three and six months of age, language and speech delays which are two separate ICD9 codes. Exposures at one, three and six months of age, the entire category of neurodevelopmental delays, which includes all of these plus a number of other disorders.”

    Dr. Verstraeten, pg. 42: “But for one thing that is for sure, there is certainly an under-ascertainment of all of these because some of the children are just not old enough to be diagnosed. So the crude incidence rates are probably much lower that what you would expect because the cohort is still very young.”

    Dr. Verstraeten, pg. 44: “Now for speech delays, which is the largest single disorder in this category of neurologic delays. The results are a suggestion of a trend with a small dip. The overall test for trend is highly statistically significant above one.”

    Dr. Verstraeten, pg. 45: "What this represents is the overall category of developmental delays, of which I have excluded speech delays because of the impression we had was some of the calculations were driven by this speech group, which was making up about half of this category. After excluding this speech group, the trend is also apparent in this group and the test for trend is also significant for this category excluding speech.”

    Dr. Weil, pg. 75: “I think that what you are saying is in term of chronic exposure. I think that the alternative scenario is that this repeated acute exposures, and like many repeated acute exposures, if you consider a dose of 25 micrograms on one day, then you are above threshold. At least we think you are, and then you do that over and over to a series of neurons where the toxic effect may be the same set of neurons or the same set of neurologic processes; it is conceivable that the more mercury you get, the more effect you are going to get.”

    Dr. Verstraeten, pg. 76: “What I have done here, I am putting into the model instead of mercury, a number of antigens that the children received, and what do we get? Not surprisingly, we get very similar estimates as what we got for Thimerosal because every vaccine put in the equation has Thimerosal. So for speech and the other ones maybe it’s not so significant, but for the overall group it is also significant….Here we have the same thing, but instead of number of antigens, number of shots. Just the number of vaccinations given to a child, which is also for nearly all of them significantly related.”

    Dr. Guess, pg. 77: "So this essentially is a 7% risk per antigen, an antigen is like in DPT you've got three antigens."

    Dr. Verstraeten, pg. 77: "Correct."

    Dr. Egan, pg. 77: "Could you do this calculation for aluminum?"

    Dr. Verstraeten, pg. 77: "I did it for aluminum…Actually the results were almost identical to ethylmercury because the amount of aluminum goes along almost exactly with the mercury one."

    Dr. Verstraeten, pg. 78-79: "Then the last slide I wanted to show, there was a question of it there was any way from this data that we could estimate what would happen in the future if there is Thimerosal-free Hep B and Thimerosal-free haemophilus influenza vaccine and only DTP has Thimerosal"

    "The second column would be the same scenario but now at six months. Assuming they have received two additional DPTs, so between three and six months of age they have increased their ethylmercury amounts by 50 micrograms. If I do in this current cohort with all its limitations, because there is also the Hep B that exists in the cohort*, I can't really take it out. It is significant for this one disorder which is language delay and is a combination of these two disorders, also becomes significant."

    * Dr. Verstraeten could not determine which children got Hep B at birth in some cases so it was difficult to back the birth dose of Hep B out of the data.

    Dr. Bernier, pg. 113: "We have asked you to keep this information confidential. We do have a plan for discussing these data at the upcoming meeting of the Advisory Committee of Immunization Practices on June 21 and June 22. At that time CDC plans to make a public release of this information*, so I think it would serve all of our interests best if we could continue to consider these data. The ACIP work group will be considering also. If we could consider these data in a certain protected environment. So we are asking people who have a great job protecting this information up until now, to continue to do that until the time of the ACIP meeting. So to basically consider this embargoed information. That would help all of us to use the machinery that we have in place for considering these data and for arriving at policy recommendations."

    [*This never happened. SafeMind.org obtained this transcript via the Freedom of Information Act. Data published later were diluted into insignificance by including additional data from an HMO that had very uncharacteristic results.]

    Dr. Keller, pgs. 116 & 118: "…we know the developing neurologic system is more sensitive than one that is fully developed…"

    Dr. Verstraeten, pg. 142: "But if I can have the next slide, here instead of the proportional hazard model, we did a logistic regression model. I didn't use person time here and it's a bit tough to define exactly the control group. However, if I do it for all ages and not looking at different years, and this is for speech, the outcome is almost identical to the proportional hazard model, which suggests to me that it is not a question of bringing the diagnosis forward, but it is really the overall number that drives this estimate."

    Dr. Rapin, pg. 143: "I would like to make a comment. We have been focusing on all these acquired causes including mercury and prematurity, and you had a list of confounding variables that should be considered in future studies. What we know today about all of the developmental disorders is that environmental factors are in fact rather unimportant in the case of these deficits and the major cause is genetic…I find it a little difficult knowing this and putting in autism. The major cause is not environmental, it is genetic and that we are focusing just on these environment events or adventitious events when we haven't considered, and you told us that you don't have data for example on siblings, your study does not lend itself to considering the major variable."

    Dr. Johnson, pg 144: "Well, I think the assumption is that those genetic predispositions would be randomly distributed."

    Dr. Rapin, pg. 144: "But you don't know that."

    Dr. Johnson, pg. 144: "No, that's an interesting assumption."

    Dr. Rapin, pg. 144: "I understand that, but you don't know that."

    Dr. Johnson, pg. 144: "just on principle, Dr. Rapin, it seems to me that the more we learn about genetics or the more we learn about let's say autism, the more we shift towards focusing on genetic causes, but would you rule out the possibility, and let's move away from autism, that some of these are genetic predisposition and then the second hit?"

    Dr. Rapin, pg. 144: "Not at all. I think that it is in fact an attractive hypothesis."

    Dr. Johnson, pg. 145: "Right, thank you."

    Dr. Chen, pg. 151: "One of the reasons that led me personally to not be so quick to dismiss the findings was that on his own Tom independently picked three different outcomes that he did not think could be associated with mercury and three out of three had a different pattern across different exposure levels as compared to the ones that again on a priority basis we picked as biologically plausible to be due to mercury exposure."

    Dr. Brent, pg. 161: "Wasn't it true that if you looked at the population that had 25 micrograms you had a certain risk and when you got to 75 micrograms you had a higher risk."

    Dr. Verstraeten, pg. 161: "Yes, absolutely, but these are all at the same time. Measured at the same age at least."

    Dr. Brent, pg. 161: I understand that, but they are different exposures."

    Dr. Verstraeten, pg. 161: "Yes."

    Dr. Brent, pg. 161: "What is your explanation? What explanations would you give for that?"

    Dr. Verstraeten, pg. 161: "Personally, I have three hypotheses. My first hypothesis is it is parental bias. The children that are more likely to be vaccinated are more likely to be picked and diagnosed. Second hypothesis, I don't know. There is a bias that I have not recognized, and nobody has yet told me about it. Third hypothesis. It's true, it's Thimerosal. Those are my hypotheses."

    Dr. Brent, pg. 161: "If it's true, which or what mechanisms would you explain the finding with?"

    Dr. Verstraeten, pg. 162: "You are asking for biological plausibility?"

    Dr. Brent, pg. 162: "Well, yes."

    Dr. Verstraeten, pg. 162: "When I saw this, and I went back through the literature, I was actually stunned by what I saw because I thought it is plausible. First of all there is the Faeroe study, which I think people have dismissed too easily, and there is a new article in the same Journal that was presented here, the Journal of Pediatrics, where they have looked at PCB. They have looked at other contaminants in seafood and they have adjusted for that, and still mercury comes out. That is one point. Another point is that in many of the studies with animals, it turned out that there is quite a different result depending on the dose of mercury. Depending on the route of exposure and depending on the age at which the animals, it turned out that there is quite a different result depending on the dose of mercury. Depending on the route of exposure and depending on the age at which the animals were exposed. Now, I don't know how much you can extrapolate that from animals to humans, but that tells me mercury at one month of age is not the same as mercury at three months, at 12 months, prenatal mercury, later mercury. There is a whole range of plausible outcomes from mercury. On top of that, I think that we cannot so easily compare the U.S. population to Faeroe or Seychelles populations. We have different mean levels of exposure. We are comparing high to high in the Seychelles, high to high in the Faeroe and low to low in the U.S., so I am not sure how easily you can transpose one finding to another one. So basically to me that leaves all the options open, and that means I can not exclude such a possible effect."

    Dr. Orenstein, pg. 184: "Well, the second issue is we don't know causality. We don't know about causality, but is this something that really warrants some urgent attention?"

    Dr. Clover, pg. 187: "…no one around here is going to say that mercury per say is not a concern."

    Dr. Weil, pg. 187 & 188: "Although the data presents a number of uncertainties, there is adequate consistency, biological plausibility, a lack of relationship with phenomenon not expected to be related, and a potential causal role that is as good as any other hypothesized etiology of explanation of the noted associations. In addition, the possibility that the associations could be causal has major significance for public and professional acceptance of Thimerosal containing vaccines. I think that is a critical issue. Finally, lack of further study would be horrendous grist for the anti-vaccination bill. That's why we need to go on, and urgently I would add.*

    Dr. Brent, pg. 188-191: "I am impressed with the fact that some people here have information and believe that like the incidence of learning difficulties, behavior disorders and attention deficit is increasing in our population. I don't know whether it is or it isn't, but that kind of information you just can't throw around and say it's true or isn't true without data. And it is such an important area in our society. I mean it is the thing that makes a human being different from the other species, so it is such an important area of research…"

    "…(thimerosal) Causing learning disabilities and behavioral disorders. ADD is a tremendous problem in our society and I think it is one that we should be very concerned about."

    "Finally, the thing that concerns me the most, those who know me, I have been a pin stick in the litigation community because of the nonsense of our litigious society. This will be a resource to our very busy plaintiff attorneys in this country when this information becomes available. They want business and this could potentially be a lot of business."

    Dr. Koller, pg. 192: "…As you increase the vaccination, you increase effects, but you don't know. You have modified live viruses. You have different antigens. There is a lot of things in those vaccinations other than mercury, and we don't know whether this is a vaccination effect or a mercury effect. But I am almost sure it is not a mercury effect. Positive as a matter of fact, and there are several experts particularly that have reviewed this, the methylmercury aspect who would agree with that due to dose response."

    Dr. Johnson, pg. 193: "Are you really comfortable with the way the neurologic function was tested in the Seychelles?"

    Dr. Koller, pg. 193: "I have to admit that there were many other tests that could have been conducted…We are talking about very subjective, very sensitive assays and yes, there could have been others done and there should be more done…"

    Dr. Johnson, pg. 198: "This association leads me to favor a recommendation that infants up to two years old not be immunized with Thimerosal containing vaccines if suitable alternative preparations are available.”

    “My gut feeling? It worries me enough. Forgive this personal comment, but I got called out at eight o'clock for an emergency call and my daughter-in-law delivered a son by C-section. Our first male in the line of the next generation, and I do not want that grandson to get a Thimerosal containing vaccine until we know better what is going on. It will probably take a long time. In the meantime, and I know there are probably implications for this internationally, but in the meantime I think I want that grandson to only be given Thimerosal-free vaccines."

    Dr. Bernier, pg 198: "the negative findings need to be pinned down and published."

    Dr. Weil, pg. 207: "The number of dose related relationships are linear and statistically significant. You can play with this all you want. They are linear. They are statistically significant. The positive relationships are those that one might expect from the Faroe Islands studies. They are also related to those data we do have on experimental animal data and similar to the neurodevelopmental tox data on other substances, so that I think you can't accept that this is out of the ordinary. It isn't out of the ordinary."

    Dr. Weil, pg. 208: "The rise in the frequency of neurobehavioral disorders whether it is ascertainment or real, is not too bad. It is much too graphic. We don't see that kind of genetic change in 30 years."

    Dr. Brent, pg. 229: "The medical/legal findings in this study, causal or not, are horrendous and therefore, it is important that the suggested epidemiological, pharmacokinetic, and animal studies be performed. If an allegation was made that a child's neurobehavioral findings were caused by Thimerosal containing vaccines, you could readily find junk scientist who would support the claim with "a reasonable degree of certainty". But you will not find a scientist with any integrity who would say the reverse with the data that is available. And that is true. So we are in a bad position from the standpoint of defending any lawsuits if they were initiated and I am concerned."

    Dr. Meyers, pg. 231: "Can I go back to the core issue about the research? My own concern, and a couple of you said it, there is an association between vaccines and outcome that worries both parents and pediatricians. We don’t really know what that outcome is, but it is one that worries us and there is an association with vaccines. We keep jumping back to Thimerosal, but a number of us are concerned that Thimerosal may be less likely than some of the potential associations that have been made. Some of the potential associations are number of injections, number of antigens, other additives. We mentioned aluminum and I mentioned yesterday aluminum and mercury. Antipyretics and analgesics are better utilized when vaccines are given. And then every body mentioned all of the ones that we can't think about in this quick time period that are a part of this association, and yet all of the questions I hear we are asking have to do with Thimerosal. My concern is we need to ask the questions about the other potential associations, because we are going to the Thimerosal-free vaccine. I f many of us don't think that this is a plausible association because of the levels and so on, then we are missing looking for the association that may be the important one."

    Dr. Caserta, pg. 234: "One of the things I learned at the Aluminum Conference in Puerto Rico that was tied into the metal lines in biology and medicine that I never really understood before, is the interactive effect of different metals when they are together in the same organism. It is not the same as when they are alone, and I think it would be foolish for us not to include aluminum as part of our thinking with this."

    Dr. Clements, pg 247- 249: "I am really concerned that we have taken off like a boat going down one arm of the mangrove swamp at high speed, when in fact there was not enough discussion really early on about which was the boat should go at all. And I really want to risk offending everyone in the room by saying that perhaps this study should not have been done at all, because the outcome of it could have, to some extent, been predicted, and we have all reached this point now where we are left hanging, even though I hear the majority of consultants say to the Board that they are not convinced there is a causality direct link between Thimerosal and various neurological outcomes."

    “I know how we handle it from here is extremely problematic. The ACIP is going to depend on comments from this group in order to move forward into policy, and I have been advised that whatever I say should not move into the policy area because that is not the point of this meeting. But nonetheless, we know from many experiences in history that the pure scientist has done research because of pure science. But that pure science has resulted in splitting the atom or some other process which is completely beyond the power of the scientists who did the research to control it. And what we have here is people who have, for every best reason in the world, pursued a direction of research. But there is not the point at which the research results have to be handled, and even if this committee decides that there is no association and that information gets out, the work that has been done and through the freedom of information that will be taken by others and will be used in ways beyond the control of this group. And I am very concerned about that as I suspect it already too late to do anything regardless of any professional body and what they say."

    "My mandate as I sit here in this group is to make sure at the end of the day the 100,000,000 are immunized with DTP, Hepatitis B and if possible Hib, this year, next year and for many years to come, and that will have to be with Thimerosal containing vaccines unless a miracle occurs and an alternative is found quickly and is tried and found to be safe."

    "So I leave you with the challenge that I am very concerned that this has gotten this far, and that having got this far, how you present in a concerted voice the information to the ACIP in a way they will be able to handle it and not get exposed to the traps which are out there in public relations. My message would be that any other study, and I like the study that has just been described here very much. I think it makes a lot of sense, but it has to be thought through. What are the potential outcomes and how will you handle it? How will it be presented to a public and media that is hungry for selecting the information they want to use for whatever means they in store for them?"

    "…but I wonder how on earth you are going to handle it from here."

    Dr. Bernier, pg. 256: "…As difficult as science is, there are two other equally tricky, complex challenges. The policy crafting has to take into consideration some very diverse and complex issues. There is another group that will deal with that, and then we have the communication and how we handle this, which I think I am no expert at, but seems equally daunting to me as the scientific and the policy issue."

    "I don’t think we can set a rule here because some people have gotten these documents. For example, some of the manufacturers were privileged to receive this information. It has been important for them to share it within the company with the experts there, so they can review it. Some of you may have questions. You may have given a copy, but I think if we will all just consider this embargoed information, if I can use that term, and very highly protected information, I think that was the best I can offer (AAPS, 2003).

    Title: Forget The Advice -- Give Us Vaccinations
    Date: March 2, 2003
    Source:
    LA Times

    Abstract: If you have followed the recent advice of the Department of Homeland Security, you have now laid in gallons of water, a battery-operated radio, duct tape, plastic sheeting and enough nonperishable food to last. For how long? No one knows. You have also prepared backpacks stuffed with warm clothes and blankets for each member of the family, and you have them all ready to go. Where? That's unclear.

    If you feel inadequately prepared, don't expect much help from the Homeland Security Web site www.ready.gov. You'll find basic tips, like to turn on a radio in the event of an attack. And there are some intriguing illustrations, like one of a man looking for the source of a chemical or biological attack while dead fish float nearby.

    But to those of us who grew up in the '50s and '60s, the government advice seems eerily reminiscent of those senseless single-file trips to a dank school basement, where we sat waiting for the all-clear bell to sound. The basements were mysterious and a trip down there was more fun than a fire alarm, which sent you outside to freeze. But what was the point? The bombs, if they had come, would have reduced us to a powdery residue, or left us to die of radiation sickness. We were too young to understand the terrible futility of "duck and cover."

    The new prescriptions are equally futile. Our government is once again treating us like docile second-graders in a dusty basement. Let's start with the concept of duct tape and plastic sheeting, an idea that comes from Israel, where it makes some sense. Scud missiles shrieking overhead are a real possibility in Israel, within easy striking distance of Iraq. Israelis are in a position, though we can hardly call it enviable, of having time to learn when a missile attack is coming, and to gather inside their sealed and sheeted rooms before a missile hits.

    What enemy are we cowering from, in our sheeted rooms? Where will the Scud missiles be launched from, and how will we know to pull our children inside? Maj. Gen. Bruce Lawlor, chief of staff to Homeland Security Secretary Tom Ridge, recently told the New York Times, "People who are making fun of it don't know what they're talking about." In fact, he said, Israelis purchased large quantities of duct tape and plastic sheeting during the Gulf War. They "relied on it" for their safety, and "it has worked," he said.

    Well, not exactly. The Scud missiles that Iraq launched at Israel during the Gulf War had no chemical or biological payloads, and so the sealed rooms saved no one. But four people died of heart attacks in their sealed rooms, and seven suffocated from incorrect use of gas masks; 229 people were apparently injured by inappropriate self-administered antibiotics, to protect against an anthrax attack that never came. Whether the sealed rooms would have saved lives had chemical or biological weapons been used, we have no way of knowing.

    A U.S. government chemical weapons expert who asked not to be identified has little patience with the recommendations, which, developed for Israel, make no sense in the United States.

    "What I think makes sense is to get away from contamination, which is what people do anyway. We run from fire, we run from hazards. People will know what to do. If you get the stuff on you, you'd shower it off," the expert said. "In most cases, with a chemical agent, you have time to get it off. And the effects of the more fearsome agents, such as cyanide, can be lessened with medical treatment. The worst-case scenarios are of enclosed spaces where people have no option to flee, but those would probably be limited in scope."

    In any event, a large-scale chemical attack using military agents such as sarin or VX is most unlikely. Another expert says, "If bad guys can get enough chemical agent into the country to launch a major attack, you've got bigger problems than chemical weapons."

    As for biological weapons, for your sealed room to do you any good, you'd have to know that an attack was coming. As a government scientist who wishes to remain anonymous puts it, the Homeland Security recommendations "give the illusion that you are doing something useful, but do not really address the problems. On the biological side, it's just totally ridiculous, because you are never going to know you've been attacked by a bio- agent cloud until it's over."

    In the unlikely event you knew an attack was coming, just staying indoors would probably protect you. In 1979, a technician working in the ultrasecret biological weapons laboratory of Sverdlovsk in the Soviet Union forgot to replace a filter, causing an explosive release of dry anthrax powder into the air. Sixty-eight people downwind from the plant eventually died of anthrax. As Peter B. Jahrling of the U.S. Army Medical Research Institute of Infectious Diseases puts it, "In Sverdlovsk, the folks inside the leaky houses were not infected; only those who were outside in the early morning hours when the release occurred were infected. So dilution is the solution, and anything which cuts down on the dose ought to be beneficial."

    Simple masks would work as well, even against smallpox and plague, the two contagious threat agents. In 1910-11 and again in 1920-21, plague experts stopped major natural outbreaks of deadly pneumonic plague in Manchuria simply by imposing a quarantine on the sick and their contacts, by keeping people at home and by wearing gauze masks whenever anyone was exposed to plague patients. Regarding smallpox, probably the most feared agent, Jahrling says, "N-100 masks probably work with 99% efficiency against smallpox. I'd opt for something that reduced my exposure one-hundredfold."

    These simple suggestions may be better than nothing. But in any event, offering us the option of "protecting ourselves" is an easy way out for the administration. There is a real solution to the threat of biological agents, but it calls for force and direction that the administration does not seem to have. It is vaccination in advance of an attack, vaccination against the most serious threat agents, anthrax, smallpox and plague.

    There is no safe, effective plague vaccine, although scientists are working to develop one. But where is the smallpox vaccine? After temporizing for nearly a year, the administration finally decided to offer vaccinations to health-care workers and public safety personnel. In the last month, with war probably imminent, fewer than 8,000 civilians have received the vaccine, and 100,000 troops.

    Instead of giving the American people a real choice -- access to existing vaccines against smallpox and anthrax -- we've been offered duct tape and plastic sheeting and told to protect ourselves. One bioterror expert who insists on anonymity maintains that in the end "more people will die from suffocation from gas masks and sealed rooms than from chemical or biological attacks. The one thing that would prepare us would be mass vaccination, and they're not even talking about that."

    Duct and cover? Thanks a lot (LA Times, 2003).

    Title: Vaccine Link Raised In U.S Troops' Deaths
    Date: August 5, 2003
    Source:
    UCLA

    Abstract: The U.S. Army should look at whether the anthrax vaccine is behind the unexplained cluster of pneumonia cases among soldiers in Iraq, according to the co-author of a government-sponsored study that last year found the vaccine was the "possible or probable" cause of pneumonia in two soldiers.

    Dr. John L. Sever of George Washington University Medical School told United Press International Tuesday that he expects the military to consider the anthrax vaccine, among other possibilities, as it investigates pneumonia among soldiers in and around Iraq, where troops have been widely vaccinated against anthrax.

    The Pentagon announced Tuesday it is investigating 100 cases of pneumonia among soldiers in Iraq and southwestern Asia. Two have died. Fifteen have had to be placed on respirators.

    "As physicians, I would think they would be looking at all possible causes. I would think vaccines would be part of that," said Sever, a medical professor at George Washington who was one of six authors of the study.

    Col. Robert DeFraites from the Army Surgeon General's office told reporters at the Pentagon briefing Tuesday that biological warfare -- including smallpox or anthrax -- was unlikely to be the cause of the pneumonia. He did not mention vaccines as a possible cause, and the issue was not raised by reporters.

    DeFraites and spokeswoman Virginia Stephanakis of the Army Surgeon General's office did not return calls Tuesday asking whether the Pentagon was looking into a possible vaccine connection.

    Sever said the anthrax vaccine study, printed in the May 2002 issue of Pharmacoepidemiology and Drug Safety, found that the vaccine was the "possible or probable" cause of pneumonia among two soldiers. The Department of Health and Human Services convened the group, called the Anthrax Vaccine Expert Committee, which studied 602 reports of possible reactions to the vaccine among nearly 400,000 troops who received it, Sever said.

    In addition to identifying pneumonia and flu-like symptoms among troops who received the vaccine, the group also looked at four other cases of potentially serious reactions, including severe back pain and two soldiers who had sudden difficulty breathing in a possible allergic reaction to the vaccine.

    Sever described the two cases of pneumonia as "wheezing and difficulty breathing going into a pneumonia-like picture."

    To conduct the study, the Anthrax Vaccine Expert Committee examined reports from the U.S. military to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention; they are anecdotal reports and do not necessarily show a cause-and-effect relationship.

    DeFraites said the two deaths under investigation by the Army Surgeon General occurred in June and July and that both soldiers had been in Iraq. He said the investigation began as soon as the first death occurred.

    In a case apparently not included in that total, 22-year-old Army specialist Rachael Lacy of Lynwood, Ill., died at the Mayo Clinic in Rochester, Minn., on April 4 of what one doctor diagnosed as pneumonia, after receiving anthrax and smallpox vaccinations but without ever having been deployed.

    Dr. Eric Pfeifer, the Minnesota coroner who performed the autopsy, told the Army Times that the smallpox and anthrax vaccines "may have" contributed to her death. "It's just very suspicious in my mind...that she's healthy, gets the vaccinations and then dies a couple weeks later." He listed "post-vaccine" problems on the death certificate.

    Moses Lacy, Rachael Lacy's father, told the Army Times that she called in March and said she had chest pains and breathing problems and had been diagnosed with pneumonia.

    One service member who was deployed to Kuwait and received the four-shot anthrax series told United Press International Tuesday he developed bronchitis and a severe cough after receiving his shots, and that about a fifth of the troops he was deployed with had similar symptoms and were prescribed medicine to treat them. His symptoms continued after he returned to the U.S., and he sought further treatment at a base clinic. He got better, but believes he nearly came down with pneumonia.

    The Pentagon dispatched two teams to look into the pneumonia: one to Iraq and another to a U.S. military base in Landstuhl, Germany, where some sick soldiers are treated (UCLA, 2003).

    Title: Robert Kennedy On The Vaccine Autism Coverup
    Date:
    October 19, 2007
    Source:
    MSNBC

    YouTube Video


    Title: Private Study Links Vaccinations To Neurological Disorders
    Date: February 14, 2008
    Source: Natural News

    Abstract: Studies financed by pharmaceutical corporations and government agencies - which are now largely under the control of big pharma - keep stating that there is no link between autism and vaccinations or thimerosal. As a previous News Target article, (http://www.NaturalNews.com/022237.html) Dissecting A Thimerosal Study demonstrates, these studies are often tainted by their funding. Nonetheless, parents find themselves under tremendous pressure, both overt and subtle, to have their children vaccinated, in spite of little or no documentation showing efficacy, let alone safety. Worse, information produced by the American Medical Association clearly demonstrates that vaccinations have done nothing to increase longevity, and may have caused increases in deaths from disease.

    Vaccination's Smoking Gun
    More dramatic, though, is a virtual smoking gun - a study showing a clear connection between neurological disorders and vaccinations. The results are dramatic, showing that more than twice the number of vaccinated children had autism than those who had not been vaccinated. Worse, the rates of vaccinated children with other neurological problems are even higher.

    Done in June 2007, the study was financed by Generation Rescue, a group of families with autistic children who have been working to find out why this has happened to their youngsters and how to help them. The study itself is a survey of 11,817 California and Oregon households, with a total of 17,674 children, 991 of whom had never been vaccinated. It was produced by SurveyUSA, an independent company.

    The SurveyUSA Study
    There seems little likelihood of bias in favor of results showing a link between vaccinations and autism, as SurveyUSA includes several pharmaceutical firms among its clientele, including Abbott Laboratories, Alcon Laboratories, AstraZeneca Pharmaceuticals, Bayer Corporation, GlaxoSmithKline, Merck Laboratories, Monsanto Company, Nexium, Pfizer, and Schering Plough — all documented in the SurveyUSA list of clients (
    http://www.surveyusa.com/index.php/who-does-surveyusa-poll-for/). If SurveyUSA has a bias, it must be in favor of the pharmaceutical corporations. Yet, this study shows a result that does not benefit any of these businesses.

    The Study's Methodology
    Nine counties in California and Oregon were selected for the study.

    California counties: San Diego, Sonoma, Orange, Sacramento, Marin

    Oregon counties: Multnomah, Marion, Jackson, Lane

    Target households were those with children ages 4 through 17. Data were gathered for 9,175 boys and 8,499 girls. Information elicited whether each child had been vaccinated and, vaccinated or not, whether the child had one or more of the following disorders:

    * Attention deficit disorder
    * Attention deficit hyperactivity disorder
    * Asperger's syndrome
    * Pervasive developmental disorder - not otherwise specified
    * Autism
    * Asthma
    * Juvenile diabetes

    Data were analyzed according to sex and county, and broken down by age ranges 4 through 10 and 11 through 17. Percentages of children with these disorders were noted according to whether they'd been vaccinated or not, and the correlation between the two numbers, called the Risk Ratio (RR), was calculated.

    The RR is a simple calculation that compares the percentage of vaccinated to unvaccinated children with each disorder. Thus, if 4.5% of vaccinated children have Asperger's and 2.7% of non-vaccinated children have the same disease, the RR is 4.5% divided by 2.7%, giving an RR value of 1.67. (4.5/2.7 = 1.67) Thus, an RR over 1.0 indicates that vaccinations are related to a higher disease incidence, and an RR under 1.0 indicate that vaccinations are related to a lower disease incidence.

    All results of the study were tabulated and have been made available to the public to assure complete transparency (
    http://www.generationrescue.org/pdf/survey.pdf). In other words, no attempt has been made to hide or otherwise manipulate the data.

    The survey was automated, thus eliminating any chance that an individual might mislead a respondent. Responses were given via telephone touchpads. This is also the manner that the Centers for Disease Control says is most accurate. The survey questions used in Sonoma County can be found here (
    http://www.generationrescue.org/pdf/questions.pdf). In my reading of the survey, there is no language that could indicate a desired response either for or against vaccinations.

    Survey Results
    The results are stunning. The data shows dramatic increases in neurological diseases and asthma in vaccinated children. Generation Rescue is cautious in its interpretations. They have taken a humble position, saying that, "We are a small non-profit organization. For less than $200,000, we were able to complete a study that the CDC, with an $8 billion a year budget, has been unable or unwilling to do. We think the results of our survey lend credibility to the urgent need to do a larger scale study to compare vaccinated and unvaccinated children for neurodevelopmental outcomes."

    On the other hand, a survey, taken randomly from 17,674 children and focused on nine counties in various areas separated by hundreds of miles, is a significant number by itself. Unless the CDC should do an equivalent study, done with the same rigor, over a larger population, then this one must stand as nothing less than a smoking gun for the link between childhood vaccinations and neurological disorders, plus asthma. The only disease in the survey that did not show an increase associated with vaccination was juvenile diabetes.

    Results Summary

    Vaccinated boys:
    * Neurological disorder, RR = 2.55 (155% more likely to have neurological disorder than unvaccinated boys)
    * ADHD, RR = 3.24 (224% more likely to have ADHD than unvaccinated boys)
    * Autism, RR = 1.61 (61% more likely to have autism than unvaccinated boys)

    Vaccinated boys ages 11-17:
    * Neurological disorder, RR = 2.58 (158% more likely to have neurological disorder than unvaccinated boys)
    * ADHD, RR = 4.17 (317% more likely to have ADHD than unvaccinated boys)
    * Autism, RR = 2.12 (112% more likely to have autism than unvaccinated boys)

    The study notes that older children are more likely to have been diagnosed with a neurological disorder, because such diagnoses are often missed in younger children. Therefore, this is likely the more accurate figure.

    All vaccinated boys and girls were 120% more likely to have asthma than unvaccinated children (RR = 2.20).

    Vaccinated girls showed no significant difference from unvaccinated girls in neurological disorders. Whether this is due to the relatively small number of girls with these same disorders or because of the relatively small number of girls with such disorders in the study is unknown.

    Conclusion: Stop Vaccinating Our Children!
    What more do you need to know? This study shows a clear link between neurological disorders and vaccinations. It indicates that autism rates may be more than double in vaccinated boys than in those who were not vaccinated.

    The question needs to be asked: Why doesn't the CDC or the FDA or the AMA do a large-scale equivalent study to determine whether the pharmaceutically-funded studies are valid? The methodology is simple, and it adheres to the techniques that the CDC has approved. Rather than continuing to spend huge amounts of money on clearly flawed studies to placate the pharmaceutical corporations and give a false sense of security to parents, it's time for these organizations to put their money where their mouth is. It's well past time for them to use Generation Rescue's methods on a national scale. This is the sort of study that can definitively show whether there's a link between neurological disorders and vaccinations.

    Until these agencies produce such a study, it's time for them to stop forcing vaccinations on our children. Let them try to prove, using transparent studies in which all children of all families contacted are included, without exception, unlike the recent one documented in Dissecting A Thimerosal Study (
    http://www.NaturalNews.com/022237.html), in which the vast majority of children were eliminated for specious reasons. Until they're willing to do this, they must stop destroying the lives of our young for their profits (Natural News, 2008).

    Title: Homeless People Die After Bird Flu Vaccine Trial In Poland
    Date: July 2, 2008
    Source: Telegraph

    Abstract: Three Polish doctors and six nurses are facing criminal prosecution after a number of homeless people died following medical trials for a vaccine to the H5N1 bird-flu virus.

    The medical staff, from the northern town of Grudziadz, are being investigated over medical trials on as many as 350 homeless and poor people last year, which prosecutors say involved an untried vaccine to the highly-contagious virus.

    Authorities claim that the alleged victims received £1-2 to be tested with what they thought was a conventional flu vaccine but, according to investigators, was actually an anti bird-flu drug.

    The director of a Grudziadz homeless centre, Mieczyslaw Waclawski, told a Polish newspaper that last year, 21 people from his centre died, a figure well above the average of about eight.

    Although authorities have yet to prove a direct link between the deaths and the activities of the medical staff, Poland's health minister, Ewa Kopacz, has said that the doctors and nurses involved should not return to their profession.

    "It is in the interests of all doctors that those who are responsible for this are punished," the minister added.

    Investigators are also probing the possibility that the medical staff may have also have deceived the pharmaceutical companies that commissioned the trials.

    The suspects said that the all those involved knew that the trial involved an anti-H5N1 drug and willingly participated.

    The news of the investigation will come as another blow to the reputation of Poland's beleaguered and poverty-stricken national health service. In 2002, a number of ambulance medics were found guilty of killing their patients for commissions from funeral companies (Telegraph, 2008).

    Title: Vaccines As Biological Weapons? Live Avian Flu Virus Placed In Baxter Vaccine Materials Sent To 18 Countries
    Date: March 3, 2009
    Source: Natural News

    Abstract: There's a popular medical thriller novel in which a global pandemic is intentionally set off by an evil plot designed to reduce the human population. In the book, a nefarious drug company inserts live avian flu viruses into vaccine materials that are distributed to countries around the world to be injected into patients as "flu shots." Those patients then become carriers for these highly-virulent strains of avian flu which go on to infect the world population and cause widespread death.

    There's only one problem with this story: It's not fiction. Or, at least, the part about live avian flu viruses being inserted into vaccine materials isn't fiction. It's happening right now.

    Deerfield, Illinois-based pharmaceutical company Baxter International Inc. has just been caught shipping live avian flu viruses mixed with vaccine material to medical distributors in 18 countries. The "mistake" (if you can call it that, see below...) was discovered by the National Microbiology Laboratory in Canada. The World Health Organization was alerted and panic spread throughout the vaccine community as health experts asked the obvious question: How could this have happened?

    As published on LifeGen.de (http://www.lifegen.de/newsip/shownews.php4?getnews=2009-02-26-5323&pc=s01), serious questions like this are being raised:

    "Baxter International Inc. in Austria 'unintentionally contaminated samples with the bird flu virus that were used in laboratories in 3 neighbouring countries, raising concern about the potential spread of the deadly disease'. Austria, Germany, Slowenia and the Czech Republic - these are the countries in which labs were hit with dangerous viruses. Not by bioterrorist commandos, but by Baxter. In other words: One of the major global pharmaceutical players seems to have lost control over a virus which is considered by many virologists to be one of the components leading some day to a new pandemic."

    Or, put another way, Baxter is acting a whole lot like a biological terrorism organization these days, sending deadly viral samples around the world. If you mail an envelope full of anthrax to your Senator, you get arrested as a terrorist. So why is Baxter -- which mailed samples of a far more deadly viral strain to labs around the world -- getting away with saying, essentially, "Oops?"

    But there's a bigger question in all this: How could this company have accidentally mixed LIVE avian flu viruses (both H5N1 and H3N2, the human form) in this vaccine material? (Natural News, 2009).

    Title: Virus Mix-Up By Lab Could Have Resulted In Pandemic
    Date: March 6, 2009
    Source: Times of India

    Abstract: It's emerged that virulent H5N1 bird flu was sent out by accident from an Austrian lab last year and given to ferrets in the Czech Republic before anyone realised. As well as the risk of it escaping into the wild, the H5N1 got mixed with a human strain, which might have spawned a hybrid that could unleash a pandemic. Last December, the Austrian branch of US vaccine company Baxter sent a batch of ordinary human H3N2 flu, altered so it couldn't replicate, to Avir Green Hills Biotechnology, also in Austria. In February, a lab in the Czech Republic working for Avir alerted Baxter that, unexpectedly, ferrets inoculated with the sample had died. It turned out the sample contained live H5N1, which Baxter uses to make vaccine. The two seem to have been mixed in error (Times, of India, 2009).

    Title: New Flu Strain Is A Genetic Mix
    Date: April 24, 2009
    Source: Reuters

    Abstract:
      A deadly swine flu never seen before has broken out in Mexico, killing at least 16 people and raising fears of a possible pandemic. World Health Organization officials said the flu has killed about 60 Mexicans.

    Here are some facts about the virus and flu viruses in general:

    1. The World Health Organization has confirmed at least some of the cases are a never-before-seen strain of influenza A virus, carrying the designation H1N1.
    2. Although it's called swine flu, this new strain is not infecting pigs and has never been seen in pigs. The threat is person to person transmission.
    3. It is genetically different from the fully human H1N1 seasonal influenza virus that has been circulating globally for the past few years. The new flu virus contains DNA typical to avian, swine and human viruses, including elements from European and Asian swine viruses.
    4. The World Health Organization is concerned but says it is too soon to change the threat level warning for a pandemic-- a global epidemic of a new and dangerous flu.
    5. When a new strain of flu starts infecting people, and when it acquires the ability to pass from person to person, it can spark a pandemic. The last pandemic was in 1968 and killed about a million people.
    6. Seven people in the United States have been diagnosed with the new strain. All have recovered, but the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention expects more cases.
    7. Flu viruses mutate constantly, which is why the flu vaccine is changed every year, and they can swap DNA in a process called reassortment. Most animals can get flu, but viruses rarely pass from one species to another.
    8. From December 2005 through February 2009, 12 cases of human infection with swine influenza were confirmed. All but one person had contact with pigs. There was no evidence of human-to-human transmission in those cases.
    9. Symptoms of swine flu in people are similar to those of seasonal influenza -- sudden onset of fever, coughing, muscle aches and extreme tiredness. Swine flu appears to cause more diarrhea and vomiting than normal flu.
    10. Seasonal flu kills between 250,000 and 500,000 people globally in an average year.
    11. In 1976 a new strain of swine flu started infecting people and worried U.S. health officials started widespread vaccination. More than 40 million people were vaccinated. But several cases of Guillain-Barre syndrome, a severe and sometime fatal condition that can be linked to some vaccines, caused the U.S. government to stop the program. The incident led to widespread distrust of vaccines in general (Reuters, 2009).  

    Title: Swine Flu Jab Link To Killer Nerve Disease: Leaked Letter Reveals Concern Of Neurologists Over 25 Deaths In America
    Date: August 15, 2009
    Source: Daily Mail

    Abstract: A warning that the new swine flu jab is linked to a deadly nerve disease has been sent by the Government to senior neurologists in a confidential letter.

    The letter from the Health Protection Agency, the official body that oversees public health, has been leaked to The Mail on Sunday, leading to demands to know why the information has not been given to the public before the vaccination of millions of people, including children, begins.

    It tells the neurologists that they must be alert for an increase in a brain disorder called Guillain-Barre Syndrome (GBS), which could be triggered by the vaccine.

    GBS attacks the lining of the nerves, causing paralysis and inability to breathe, and can be fatal.

    The letter, sent to about 600 neurologists on July 29, is the first sign that there is concern at the highest levels that the vaccine itself could cause serious complications.

    It refers to the use of a similar swine flu vaccine in the United States in 1976 when:

    1.     More people died from the vaccination than from swine flu.

    2.     500 cases of GBS were detected.

    3.     The vaccine may have increased the risk of contracting GBS by eight times.

    4.     The vaccine was withdrawn after just ten weeks when the link with GBS became clear.

    5.     The US Government was forced to pay out millions of dollars to those affected.

    Concerns have already been raised that the new vaccine has not been sufficiently tested and that the effects, especially on children, are unknown.

    It is being developed by pharmaceutical companies and will be given to about 13million people during the first wave of immunisation, expected to start in October.

    Top priority will be given to everyone aged six months to 65 with an underlying health problem, pregnant women and health professionals.

    The British Neurological Surveillance Unit (BNSU), part of the British Association of Neurologists, has been asked to monitor closely any cases of GBS as the vaccine is rolled out.

    One senior neurologist said last night: ‘I would not have the swine
    flu jab because of the GBS risk.’

    There are concerns that there could be a repeat of what became known as the ‘1976 debacle’ in the US, where a swine flu vaccine killed 25 people – more than the virus itself.

    A mass vaccination was given the go-ahead by President Gerald Ford because scientists believed that the swine flu strain was similar to the one responsible for the 1918-19 pandemic, which killed half a million Americans and 20million people worldwide.

    Within days, symptoms of GBS were reported among those who had been immunised and 25 people died from respiratory failure after severe paralysis. One in 80,000 people came down with the condition. In contrast, just one person died of swine flu.

    More than 40million Americans had received the vaccine by the time the programme was stopped after ten weeks. The US Government paid out millions of dollars in compensation to those affected.

    The swine flu virus in the new vaccine is a slightly different strain from the 1976 virus, but the possibility of an increased incidence of GBS remains a concern.

    Shadow health spokesman Mike Penning said last night: ‘The last thing we want is secret letters handed around experts within the NHS. We need a vaccine but we also need to know about potential risks.

    ‘Our job is to make sure that the public knows what’s going on. Why
    is the Government not being open about this? It’s also very worrying if GPs, who will be administering the vaccine, aren’t being warned.’

    Two letters were posted together to neurologists advising them of the concerns. The first, dated July 29, was written by Professor Elizabeth Miller, head of the HPA’s Immunisation Department.

    It says: ‘The vaccines used to combat an expected swine influenza pandemic in 1976 were shown to be associated with GBS and were withdrawn from use.

    ‘GBS has been identified as a condition needing enhanced surveillance when the swine flu vaccines are rolled out.

    ‘Reporting every case of GBS irrespective of vaccination or disease history is essential for conducting robust epidemiological analyses capable of identifying whether there is an increased risk of GBS in defined time periods after vaccination, or after influenza itself, compared with the background risk.’

    The second letter, dated July 27, is from the Association of British Neurologists and is written by Dr Rustam Al-Shahi Salman, chair of its surveillance unit, and Professor Patrick Chinnery, chair of its clinical research committee.

    It says: ‘Traditionally, the BNSU has monitored rare diseases for long periods of time. However, the swine influenza (H1N1) pandemic has overtaken us and we need every member’s involvement with a new BNSU survey of Guillain-Barre Syndrome that will start on August 1 and run for approximately nine months.

    ‘Following the 1976 programme of vaccination against swine influenza in the US, a retrospective study found a possible eight-fold increase in the incidence of GBS.

    ‘Active prospective ascertainment of every case of GBS in the UK is required. Please tell BNSU about every case.

    ‘You will have seen Press coverage describing the Government’s concern about releasing a vaccine of unknown safety.’

    If there are signs of a rise in GBS after the vaccination programme begins, the Government could decide to halt it.

    GBS attacks the lining of the nerves, leaving them unable to transmit signals to muscles effectively.

    It can cause partial paralysis and mostly affects the hands and feet. In serious cases, patients need to be kept on a ventilator, but it can be fatal.

    Death is caused by paralysis of the respiratory system, causing the victim to suffocate.
    It is not known exactly what causes GBS and research on the subject has been inconclusive.

    However, it is thought that one in a million people who have a seasonal flu vaccination could be at risk and it has also been linked to people recovering from a bout of flu of any sort.

    The HPA said it was part of the Government’s pandemic plan to monitor GBS cases in the event of a mass vaccination campaign, regardless of the strain of flu involved.
    But vaccine experts warned that the letters proved the programme was a ‘guinea-pig trial’.

    Dr Tom Jefferson, co-ordinator of the vaccines section of the influential Cochrane Collaboration, an independent group that reviews research, said: ‘New vaccines never behave in the way you expect them to. It may be that there is a link to GBS, which is certainly not something I would wish on anybody.

    ‘But it could end up being anything because one of the additives in one of the vaccines is a substance called squalene, and none of the studies we’ve extracted have any research on it at all.’

    He said squalene, a naturally occurring enzyme, could potentially cause so-far-undiscovered side effects.

    Jackie Fletcher, founder of vaccine support group Jabs, said: ‘The Government would not be anticipating this if they didn’t think there was a connection. What we’ve got is a massive guinea-pig trial.’

    Professor Chinnery said: ‘During the last swine flu pandemic, it was observed that there was an increased frequency of cases of GBS. No one knows whether it was the virus or the vaccine that caused this.

    ‘The purpose of the survey is for us to assess rapidly whether there is an increase in the frequency of GBS when the vaccine is released in the UK. It also increases consultants’ awareness of the condition.

    ‘This is a belt-and-braces approach to safety and is not something people should be substantially worried about as it’s a rare condition.’

    If neurologists do identify a case of GBS, it will be logged on a central database.

    Details about patients, including blood samples, will be collected and monitored by the HPA.

    It is hoped this will help scientists establish why some people develop the condition and whether it is directly related to the vaccine.

    But some question why there needs to be a vaccine, given the risks. Dr Richard Halvorsen, author of The Truth About Vaccines, said: ‘For people with serious underlying health problems, the risk of dying from swine flu is probably greater than the risk of side effects from the vaccine.

    ‘But it would be tragic if we repeated the US example and ended up with more casualties from the jabs.

    ‘I applaud the Government for recognising the risk but in most cases this is a mild virus which needs a few days in bed. I’d question why we need a vaccine at all.’

    Professor Miller at the HPA said: ‘This monitoring system activates pandemic plans that have been in place for a number of years. We’ll be able to get information on whether a patient has had a prior influenza illness and will look at whether influenza itself is linked to GBS.

    ‘We are not expecting a link to the vaccine but a link to disease, which would make having the vaccine even more important.’

    The UK’s medicines watchdog, the Medicines and Healthcare Products Regulatory Agency, is already monitoring reported side effects from Tamiflu and Relenza and it is set to extend that surveillance to the vaccine.

    A Department of Health spokesperson said: ‘The European Medicines Agency has strict processes in place for licensing pandemic vaccines.

    ‘In preparing for a pandemic, appropriate trials to assess safety and the immune responses have been carried out on vaccines very similar to the swine flu vaccine. The vaccines have been shown to have a good safety profile.

    ‘It is extremely irresponsible to suggest that the UK would use a vaccine without careful consideration of safety issues. The UK has one of the most successful immunisation programmes in the world.’

    I Couldn’t Eat or Speak…It was Horrendous

    But within hours, she was on a ventilator in intensive care after being diagnosed with Guillain-Barre Syndrome.

    She spent three months in hospital and had to learn how to talk and walk again. But at times, when she was being fed through a drip and needed a tracheotomy just to breathe, she doubted whether she would survive.

    The mother of two, 57, from Maryport, Cumbria, had been in good health until she developed a chest infection in March 2006. She gradually became so weak she could not walk downstairs.

    Doctors did not diagnose Guillain-Barre until her condition worsened in hospital and tests showed her reflexes slowing down. It is impossible for doctors to know how she contracted the disorder, although it is thought to be linked to some infections.

    Mrs Wilkinson said: ‘It was very scary. I couldn’t eat and I couldn’t speak. My arms and feet had no strength and breathing was hard.

    I was treated with immunoglobulin, which are proteins found in blood, to stop damage to my nerves. After ten days, I still couldn’t speak and had to mime to nurses or my family.

    ‘It was absolutely horrendous and I had no idea whether I would get through it. You reach very dark moments at such times and wonder how long it can last.

    But I’m a very determined person and I had lots of support.’

    After three weeks, she was transferred to a neurological ward, where she had an MRI scan and nerve tests to assess the extent of the damage.

    Still unable to speak and in a wheelchair, Mrs Wilkinson eventually began gruelling physiotherapy to improve her muscle strength and movement but it was exhausting and painful.

    Three years later, she is almost fully recovered. She can now walk for several miles at a time, has been abroad and carries out voluntary work for a GBS Support Group helpline.

    She said: ‘It makes me feel wary that the Government is rolling out this vaccine without any clear idea of the GBS risk, if any. I wouldn’t wish it on anyone and it certainly changed my life.

    ‘I’m frightened to have the swine flu vaccine if this might happen again – it’s a frightening illness and I think more research needs to be done on the effect of the vaccine.’

    Hotline staff given access to confidential records


    Confidential NHS staff records and disciplinary complaints could be accessed by hundreds of workers manning the Government’s special swine flu hotline.

    They were able to browse through a database of emails containing doctors’ and nurses’ National Insurance numbers, home addresses, dates of birth, mobile phone numbers and scanned passport pages – all details that could be used fraudulently.

    And private and confidential complaints sent by hospitals about temporary medical staff – some of whom were named – were also made available to the call-centre workers, who were given a special password to log in to an internal NHS website.

    It could be a breach of the Data Protection Act.

    The hotline staff work for NHS Professionals, which was set up using taxpayers’ money to employ temporary medical and administrative staff for the health service.

    The not-for-profit company runs two of the Government’s swine flu call centres – with 300 staff in Farnborough, Hampshire, and 900 in Watford, Hertfordshire.

    Shadow Health Secretary Andrew Lansley described the revelations as ‘disturbing’.

    Anne Mitchell, a spokeswoman for Unison, said: ‘There’s no excuse for such a fundamental breach of personal security. Action needs to be taken as soon as possible to make sure this does not happen again.’

    A spokeswoman for NHS Professionals would not confirm whether access to the confidential files had been granted (Daily Mail, 2009).

    Title: Does Virus Vaccine Increase The Risk Of Cancer?
    Date: August 21, 2009
    Source: Bild

    Abstract: The swine flu vaccine has been hit by new cancer fears after a German health expert gave a shock warning about its safety.

    Lung specialist Wolfgang Wodarg has said that there are many risks associated with the vaccine for the H1N1 virus.

    He has grave reservations about the firm Novartis who are developing the vaccine and testing it in Germany. The vaccination is injected “with a very hot needle”, Wodarg said.

    The nutrient solution for the vaccine consists of cancerous cells from animals and "we do not know if there could be an allergic reaction".

    But more importantly, some people fear that the risk of cancer could be increased by injecting the cells.

    The vaccine - as Johannes Löwer, president of the Paul Ehrlich Institute, has pointed out - can also cause worse side effects than the actual swine flu virus.

    Wodrag also described people’s fear of the pandemic as an "orchestration": “It is great business for the pharmaceutical industry,” he told the ‘Neuen Presse’.

    Swine flu is not very different from normal flu. “On the contrary if you look at the number of cases it is nothing compared to a normal flu outbreak,” he added.

    The chairman of the health committee in the European Council has urged for a careful and calm reaction to the virus.

    Up until now, the producers of the vaccine did not know how many orders they would have by the autumn, but the German Government is now a guaranteed customer.

    Even the pharmaceutical companies are trying to exploit the fear of the swine flu pandemic (Bild, 2009).

    Title: In Germany, A Better Vaccine For Politicians?
    Date: October 27, 2009
    Source: TIME

    Abstract: Critics are calling it a two-tier health system — one for the politically well connected, another for the hoi polloi. As Germany launched its mass-vaccination program against the H1N1 flu virus on Monday, the government found itself fending off accusations of favoritism because it was offering one vaccine believed to have fewer side effects to civil servants, politicians and soldiers, and another, potentially riskier vaccine to everyone else. The government had hoped that Germans would rush to health clinics to receive vaccinations against the rapidly spreading disease, but now rising anger over the different drugs may cause many people to shy away.

    Amid growing fears of a possible global flu pandemic, the German government prepared for its mass-vaccination campaign earlier this year by ordering 50 million doses of the Pandemrix vaccine, enough for a double dose for 25 million people, about a third of the population. The vaccine, manufactured by GlaxoSmithKline, contains an immunity-enhancing chemical compound, known as an adjuvant, whose side effects are not yet entirely known. Then, after a report was leaked to the German media last week, the Interior Ministry confirmed that it had ordered a different vaccine, Celvapan, for government officials and the military. Celvapan, which is made by U.S. pharmaceutical giant Baxter, does not contain an adjuvant and is believed to have fewer side effects than Pandemrix. (See how not to get the H1N1 flu.)

    Anger at the news was widespread in Germany. "If mass vaccination is considered to be necessary, then everyone should be treated the same way," says Birgitt Bender, health spokeswoman for the Green Party. Ulrike Mascher, head of the VdK social-welfare association, says giving government officials a vaccine that's different from that given to the rest of the population sent the "wrong signal" and gives many people "the impression that they are second-class patients." A story on the front page of the mass-circulation Bild newspaper accused the government of giving "second-class medicine" to regular Germans.

    Doctors and medical experts are divided over the safety of Pandemrix. While some say it's the best vaccine available, others have serious misgivings about it. "The Pandemrix vaccine can't be recommended for pregnant women or young children because it has an increased risk of side effects. Pandemrix has an adjuvant which hasn't been tested sufficiently up until now," Alexander Kekulé, a virologist at the University of Halle, tells TIME. "Celvapan is a whole-virus vaccine, which has fewer side effects than Pandemrix, but it leads more often to fever or local swelling when compared with the normal seasonal-flu vaccine," he adds. Although Kekulé calls the government's handling of the vaccination program a "scandal," he says government officials and soldiers are not necessarily getting a better deal with Celvapan. "Neither Celvapan nor Pandemrix are ideal," he says. (See what you need to know about the H1N1 vaccine.)

    The Interior Ministry hit back at suggestions of preferential treatment, saying it had ordered about 200,000 doses of the Celvapan vaccine from Baxter before the differences between the two vaccines were documented, and the government was bound by the terms of its contract. The government also points out that both Pandemrix and Celvapan have been approved by the European Union and that other countries, such as Britain and Sweden, are using the Pandemrix vaccine. In an attempt to put a lid on the simmering controversy, Chancellor Angela Merkel's spokesman, Ulrich Wilhelm, said the German leader would consult with her doctor in the next few days, and if she decided to receive a jab, it would be Pandemrix. (See pictures of thermal scanners hunting for swine flu.)

    At least 26,000 people have been infected with swine flu in Germany, resulting in three deaths. Although the majority of patients have experienced only mild flulike symptoms, a steady increase in the number of cases of H1N1 in recent months has raised alarm across the nation. In its latest report, the Robert Koch Institute, the federal agency for infectious diseases, said new cases in Germany have jumped to about 1,600 each week, double the 700 to 800 weekly cases reported in early autumn. With the onset of winter, when seasonal-flu infections typically peak, many experts are concerned that H1N1 infections will spike dramatically. Klaus Osterrieder, a virologist at the Free University of Berlin, now fears that with the worries over the possible risks associated with Pandemrix, many people will avoid getting a vaccine altogether. According to a survey conducted on Oct. 23 by the Emnid Institute, only 13% of Germans said they wanted to receive a swine-flu vaccine this winter. (Read "Child-Care Centers and Parents Brace for Flu Season.")

    "The public debate is bad because it raises questions about the whole vaccination program," Osterrieder says. If the government doesn't find some way to remedy the current public relations disaster and clear up the confusion over the different swine-flu vaccines, it could be faced with an even greater emergency, especially if the country's hospital wards start overflowing with flu patients in the coming months (TIME, 2009).

    Title: Soldiers Nearly Killed With Military's Bioterrorism Vaccine
    Date: November 3, 2009
    Source: Natural News

    Abstract: Approximately 200 soldiers have suffered from serious and even life-threatening complications from the government-mandated smallpox vaccine, and one has even died.

    Starting in 2002, fears over a bioterrorist attack have led the U.S. government to require that all of its military servicepeople receive vaccination against a variety of diseases before deployment, including anthrax and smallpox. An estimated 1.7 million have been vaccinated against smallpox since then. Yet in a number of cases, the vaccine has led to severe complications such as inflammations of the brain or heart. In 2003, two expert panels concluded that Army Specialist Rachel Ray died in part due to complications from the deployment vaccines that she had been given.

    "The reality is, we're never going to have zero risk on a vaccine," said Dr. Michael Kilpatrick of the Military Health System. "There's always going to be that individual that has some untoward event that would occur."

    Awareness of the risks over the smallpox vaccine has prevented the government from requiring vaccination of civilians.

    One potential side effect is infection with the virus used in the vaccine, a condition known as progressive vaccinia. Back when smallpox vaccination was widespread, the infection had a 15 percent fatality rate.

    In a recent case, Lance Cpl. Cory Belken began to suffer from a persistent headache and unusual sleepiness one week after receiving the smallpox vaccine. He was diagnosed with acute myelogenous leukemia, which was destroying his circulatory system, and was immediately placed on chemotherapy.

    The cancer treatment destroyed his immune system, leading to progressive vaccinia and no fewer than two infections with antibiotic-resistant bacteria. He broke out in a rash, had spreading vaccinia lesions all over his body, became delirious with a fever of 104.6 degrees, and began to suffer from organ failure.

    Treating Belken required 30 times the dose of Vaccinia Immune Globulin that the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention has previously assumed would be needed for a single person.

    Belken's family said that the leukemia would have been enough for their family to deal with, without vaccine complications on top of it.

    "I think it's a big chance they're taking giving them the shots," his mother said (Natural News, 2009).

    Title: Supreme Court Rules Against Parents In Vaccine Case
    Date:
    March 1, 2011
    Source:
    USA Today

    Abstract:
    The Supreme Court ruled Tuesday that the parents of a child who suffered seizures after a routine vaccination cannot sue the drugmaker.

    The Supreme Court ruled Tuesday that a federal law bars lawsuits against drugmakers over serious side effects from childhood vaccines. The vaccine was made by Wyeth, now owned by Pfizer.

    By a 6-2 vote, the justices said a 1986 law that set up a special court and compensation fund for injuries stemming from vaccines bars all design-defect lawsuits against vaccine manufacturers.

    The American Academy of Pediatrics, which along with the U.S. government had urged the court to bar such lawsuits, said the decision will enhance the national immunization system and ensure "that vaccines will continue to prevent the spread of infectious diseases in this country."

    Lawyers who represent children who have suffered adverse effects, including the American Association for Justice and Public Citizen, said the ruling is a disincentive for manufacturers to put safer vaccines on the market.

    The case against Wyeth, now owned by Pfizer, began in Pennsylvania, brought by Russell and Robalee Bruesewitz. Their daughter Hannah began suffering seizures in 1992, when at 6 months she was injected with a Wyeth-made vaccine for diphtheria, tetanus and pertussis (DTP). Hannah, now 19, has been developmentally impaired since.

    Lower federal courts had thrown out the suit, and Tuesday the high court affirmed. The Bruesewitz family had gone first to the vaccine court, but that court said they failed to show the seizures were caused by the DTP vaccine.

    Justice Antonin Scalia, who wrote for the majority, said the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act was intended to protect against injuries yet "stabilize" a vaccine industry racked by vaccine-related litigation. It aimed to provide a balance between compensation for children's injuries and protection for drugmakers from litigation.

    He noted that the law made it relatively easy for families with claims of side effects to win awards from a fund created by a tax on drugmakers. At the same time, the law shielded manufacturers from liability in court.

    The disputed text at the core of the Bruesewitz case says that "no vaccine manufacturer shall be held liable in a civil action" for any injury that "resulted from side effects that were unavoidable." The majority read that to override all design-defect claims.

    Scalia was joined by Chief Justice John Roberts and Justices Anthony Kennedy, Clarence Thomas, Stephen Breyer and Samuel Alito.

    Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Sonia Sotomayor dissented. In a statement by Sotomayor, signed by Ginsburg, they said the vaccine act did not clearly block lawsuits for design defect. They said drugmakers had long been subject to litigation and the "duty ... to improve the designs of their vaccines."

    Justice Elena Kagan, who had been U.S. solicitor general, took no part in the case.

    Pfizer Executive Vice President Amy Schulman praised the decision, stressing that "expert federal agencies" should determine "the optimal design of lifesaving childhood vaccines."

    Washington lawyer David Frederick, who represented the Bruesewitz family and its claim that an outdated design caused Hannah's injuries, said the decision lifts any incentive for drugmakers "to comport with the most recent scientific advances in designing safer vaccines."

    There was more at stake Tuesday than a single case, says Paul Offit, head of infectious diseases at Children's Hospital of Philadelphia and inventor of a vaccine against rotavirus, a diarrheal illness. He called it "a very good day for kids and parents" (USA Today, 2011).

    Title: How To Test The Anthrax Vaccine In Children
    Date: October 27, 2011
    Source: ABC News

    Abstract:
    Later this week, a Federal advisory committee, the Health and Human Service Department’s National Biodefense Science Board will recommend whether and how the anthrax vaccine should be tested in children. Why is the board, all MDs and PhDs, being consulted now?

    1. Because the safe and effective vaccine that is used by the military has never been tested in children. If there were releases of anthrax, children would need protection. Quarantine or isolation might not keep them away from sources of the disease. Parents would be in the awful position of having a vaccine for themselves and nothing for their children.
    2. Because the board has been told by the intelligence agencies that the threat of anthrax releases in the United States is “credible,” even if not quantifiable.

    The board will be making public health judgments about the risks of testing the vaccine in children.  But the intelligence agencies alone will assess how likely it is that anthrax will be released in the United States.  Even if the CIA or Defense Intelligence Agency provided classified information to the board’s public health participants so they could understand what is new since the anthrax scare ten years ago, the latter will not be able to share that information with the public.

    A vaccine trial to establish safety in young children whose immature immune system might respond differently than adults’, would involve relatively few subjects, but their parents would have to “volunteer” them.  On what basis would parents make that decision?  Can they balance the risks and consequences of anthrax release against the risks and consequences of possible reactions to the vaccine for their children?

    How can they assess the risk of releases? Parents offered a slot in the anthrax vaccine trial for their children would have to rely on the same experts who believed there were biological weapon stockpiles in Iraq. In the run-up to the invasion of Iraq, our government intelligence agencies invented a biological weapons threat, imagining Iraqi stockpiles of smallpox virus and anthrax spores; stockpiles that were never found.

    Trust dissipated.  And when the government launched a public health program to give smallpox vaccine to first responders and military personnel, most of them rejected it. The program floundered.

    Civilian public health experts will be little help to parents.  They are appropriately wary of saying “Trust me,” particularly when it is unlikely that the intelligence agencies will share their information that support the claim that the threat is “credible.” Surely they will not allowed to relay classified information to the public.

    Can we get beyond our distrust of the intelligence community and meet the needs of public health professionals to explain their decisions to the public?  Possibly not, but there may be a way around the problem, a way to find the right group of “volunteer” children.

    You want to find the right children to receive experimental injections of the anthrax vaccine? How about the children of people who have the national security clearance required for the government to share with them all the evidence that adds up to a “credible threat?” With that information in hand, these parents would be able to make the choice-an informed decision for their children-that the rest of the public surely cannot (ABC News, 2011).

    Title: The 10 Biggest Vaccine News Stories Of 2011
    Date:
    December 30, 2011
    Source:
    Natural News

    Abstract:
    A lot happened in the vaccine industry in 2011 -- a year of accelerating change and increased awareness among the people. One of the big realizations that hit home in 2011 is that vaccines are far more dangerous than most people previously thought, and even conventional scientists are starting to question the over-vaccination of infants and children.

    Here are the 10 biggest vaccine news stories of 2011, reported on NaturalNews.com:

    #1 - Japanese children die from vaccines

    Yet more evidence emerges of the deadly side effects of vaccines:
    http://www.naturalnews.com/031616_vaccines_Japan.html

    #2 - U.S. government recruits churches to push flu shots on congregation members

    Take that flu shot, or you'll go to Hell! That's the new message the U.S. government is trying to pound into the heads of church pastors and priests:
    http://www.naturalnews.com/034394_churches_flu_shots_vaccinations.htm...

    #3 - Top CDC vaccine scientist indicted for fraud

    You probably never read this story elsewhere, but one of the CDC's top researchers was indicted for allegedly stealing vaccine research money and using it to buy fancy vehicles and a luxury home:
    http://www.naturalnews.com/032216_Thorsen_fraud.html

    #4 - IOM admits MMR vaccines cause seizures and measles

    In a groundbreaking report, the Institute of Medicine openly admitted that vaccines actually cause the very measles they claim to prevent. The mainstream media, of course, misreported this research and utterly failed to cover the real story.
    http://www.naturalnews.com/033447_Institute_of_Medicine_vaccines.html

    #5 - CDC openly admits flu vaccines don't work

    Here's news you don't see every day: The CDC openly admits that vaccine flu shots "wear off," meaning they simply do not work in the way vaccine-pushing immunologists told us they did.
    http://www.naturalnews.com/032558_flu_shots_wear_off.html

    #6 - Merck vaccine scientist Dr. Maurice Hilleman admits vaccines contain cancer-causing viruses

    The actual admission happened decades ago, but news of it only went viral in 2011 as alternative news websites like NaturalNews publicized the once-secret audio recordings revealing shocking admissions by Dr. Maurice Hilleman.
    http://www.naturalnews.com/033584_Dr_Maurice_Hilleman_SV40.html

    #7 - HPV vaccines found contaminated with HPV!

    Pretty clever, huh? Just lace the HPV vaccines with the DNA of HPV itself, and you can spread the disease to create more fear that sells more vaccines!
    http://www.naturalnews.com/033585_Gardasil_contamination.html

    #8 - Swine flu vaccine admittedly causes neurological disorders

    2011 was the year that the nation of Finland openly admitted on the record that swine flu vaccines "conclusively" cause neurological disorders. It then offered to pay the lifetime medical costs of those damaged by such vaccines.

    Remember, the USA continues to absurdly claim that vaccines cause NO damage (not to anyone) and are perfectly safe for infants, children and even pregnant women!
    http://www.naturalnews.com/033816_swine_flu_vaccines_neurological_dis...

    #9 - Science says flu vaccines only work on 1 out of 100

    Now, even the scientists can't argue with their own science, can they? Rigorous studies published in peer-reviewed medical journals reveal that flu vaccines hardly work at all and are wasted on 98.5 out of 100 people who take them.
    http://www.naturalnews.com/033998_influenza_vaccines_effectiveness.ht...

    #10 - Hallmark caught distributing flu shot compliance cards to new moms

    Yes, even the Hallmark card company is now pushing vaccines. Plotting alongside state agencies in Florida, Colorado and elsewhere, the company pushes out cutesy flu shot "compliance" cards that urge new moms to have their newborn babies injected with dozens of combination vaccines, complete with mercury and chemical adjuvants that cause neurological disorders:
    http://www.naturalnews.com/034365_Hallmark_vaccines_newborns.html (Natural News, 2011).

    Title: Flip Side Of India’s Polio Success Story
    Date: January 15, 2012
    Source:
    Telegraph India

    Abstract: India’s health ministry, celebrating a year of freedom from wild polio, now faces a dilemma that public health experts had predicted years ago: the very vaccine it is using to fight polio is causing more polio paralysis than the wild poliovirus.

    India observed last Thursday as a milestone, marking a full year without polio caused by a wild poliovirus.

    But surveillance data show that last year, seven children in India developed polio from vaccine-derived poliovirus (VDPV), the medical term for a virus from the oral polio vaccine (OPV) that has regained the ability to cause disease.

    Such infections occur when virus from the OPV, after being excreted by vaccinated children, regains neuro-virulence and the ability to circulate in the environment and strikes other vulnerable children.

    Public health experts also estimate that between 100 and 180 children in India develop vaccine-associated polio paralysis (VAPP) each year, a rare but serious side effect of the OPV they had received to protect them from the wild poliovirus. As opposed to VDPV infection, VAPP affects the vaccinated children themselves.

    “Our war on polio isn’t over,” said T. Jacob John, a former head of virology at the Christian Medical College, Vellore.

    “Even if India remains free of wild polio in 2012 and 2013, it will need to pencil a strategy to eradicate all of polio — including VDPV (infections) and VAPP.”

    Paediatricians and public health experts emphasise that it is the OPV alone that has helped India achieve the current zero level of wild polio — after thousands of infections each year during the 1980s and 1990s.

    “It is the OPV that is even now preventing tens of thousands of children in India from getting polio every year. It is important to appreciate the huge number of cases this vaccine is averting,” said Hamid Jafari, head of the National Polio Surveillance Project, a joint initiative by the health ministry and the World Health Organisation.

    “We are not out of the woods yet. India will need to continue using the OPV for several years to secure eradication, to maintain high levels of immunity among children, and to prevent any re-emergence of polio,” Jafari told The Telegraph.

    Wild poliovirus circulation persists in Pakistan, Nigeria and Afghanistan. Health officials are wary that the movement of people, which had once carried polio from India into Angola, might now bring polio back into India from these countries.

    Both VDPV infections and VAPP are long-recognised problems linked with the OPV, which is made from weakened but live viruses. Many countries, including America and Britain, have switched to an alternative, inactivated and injectible polio vaccine (IPV) made from killed viruses with no risk of vaccine-linked polio.

    India’s public immunisation programme relies exclusively on the use of the OPV, and the IPV is used in India only in the private sector. The Indian Academy of Paediatrics recommends three doses of the IPV at six, ten and 14 weeks after birth, to be given along with routine doses of the OPV.

    Polio control experts are particularly worried about VDPV. Global surveillance efforts picked up 430 cases of VDPV from several countries between July 2009 and March 2011. As long as OPV is used, virologists, say the world is at risk of VDPV causing polio in unprotected children.

    Achieving a polio-free world will require the “cessation of all OPV” and with it the elimination of the risk of VAPP or VDPV infections, two immunisation experts, Stephen Cochi and Robert Linkins, from the Centers for Disease Control in the US said this week in the Journal of Infectious Diseases.

    The India Expert Advisory Group, a body of international experts advising India on polio, had last July urged the health ministry to develop a road map for the eradication of all polio: that is, both wild and vaccine-linked polio.

    In the six months since then, the health ministry has not articulated how it plans to approach the polio endgame.

    “We have been struggling to eradicate the wild virus,” said Ajay Khera, deputy commissioner for immunisation in the health ministry.

    “We have no policy yet on what to do after eradication of the wild poliovirus. We are waiting for a global consensus to emerge on the way forward.” Public health experts have long predicted financial and logistical hurdles in future efforts to replace OPV with IPV.

    “The solutions aren’t going to be easy,” John said from Vellore.

    The IPV is expensive and there are concerns that the industry may not have enough of the vaccine to supply it to India. But an articulation of vaccine policy by the government may stimulate the industry into bolstering capacity, John said.

    In a commentary three years ago in the Indian Journal of Medical Research, calling on the government to pencil an endgame eradication strategy, John and a Bijnore-based paediatrician, Vipin Vashishta, had cited a Sanskrit proverb: “Do not wait to dig a well till the house starts burning.”

    “The fire is here now,” John said yesterday. “But it appears that India hasn’t even decided to dig the well” (Telegraph India, 2012).

    Title: Baby Dies After 9 Vaccines In One Day
    Date:
    January 19, 2012
    Source:
    VacTruth

    Abstract:
      The end of last year was masked with sadness for Belgium parents Raphaël Sirjacobs & Béatrice Dupont, as their nine week old daughter Stacy Sirjacobs lost her fight for life. Stacy died just one week after her first vaccinations and left her twin sister Lesly behind. Devastated by their loss their parents are convinced that vaccines and hospital failures were the cause of their beautiful daughters death.

    Stacy and Lesly were born one month premature by Caesarean section and spent the next four days in an incubator. Stacy needed resuscitation at birth.

    Following medical advice parents Sirjacobs and Dupont decided to have the twins vaccinated. Stacy was slightly unwell with a cold on the day of her vaccinations but doctors assured her parents that it was safe to give her the vaccinations.

    (It is worth noting that there is a history of Sudden Infant Death and allergies in the family. The twins were being prescribed a milk supplement due to a milk allergy at the time Stacy became ill)

    The twins received Prevenar, a vaccine against meningitis and pneumonia, Infanrix Hexa, a six in one vaccination for diphtheria, tetanus, polio, pertussis, hepatitis B and Haemophilus type B, and finally the Rotarix, a preventive vaccine for gastroenteritis.

    This means that these tiny vulnerable babies received a staggering nine vaccines in one day, vaccines that may have caused one of them to die.

    A week after her vaccinations Stacy became unwell with a fever of 39.9 degrees C. Her parents decided to administer Perdolan to lower her fever. As their daughter was still very poorly they called the hospital who advised them to bring their daughter in.

    The medical staff diagnosed Stacy with a slight chest infection and infection in her blood and told her parents not to worry as this was “not serious”. Stacy was then given medication and put on a drip feed and kept in for observation.

    Stacy’s father informed me that all links to the vaccines were strongly denied.

    Despite Stacy having a heartbeat of 200 to 230 beats per minute the pediatrician told her parents that she was fine and that she was probably suffering from gastroenteritis (an illness that this little girl had been vaccinated against!).

    The worried couple decided not to leave their daughter and remained by her bedside. During the evening they informed the nurse that their daughter had diarrhea but to their astonishment, they were told that the baby had been changed and they were to let her get some sleep and change her when she woke up.

    During the night, Stacy continued to suffer ‘abnormal diarrhea’, and despite frantic pleas from her parents the nurse refused to do anything, even though by this time Stacy was restless and in obvious distress. Stacy’s father says that they reported to nursing staff that Stacy was covered in small red spots and had difficulty breathing.

    According to Stacy’s father, Stacy’s medical records states that at 19.45 a doctor telephoned his brother to ask his permission to do a lumbar puncture and put Stacy on the antibiotic Ampire, while they were awaiting the results. Authorization was denied …

    Stacy died a short time later.

    Stacy’s father says: (translated from French by Google translate)

    “The nurse 23h phone to the pediatrician to inform him that the little Stacy is worse, this one happens to 11:45 p.m. ET begins to make attempts at resuscitation. He informed at the time the parents that the baby is not breathing on their own, and asks them to leave the room. Would follow three hours, during which everything is sought to revive the girl, who is declared dead at 3am. But in fact, the heart stopped beating Stacy at midnight.

    The pediatrician then began to explain to parents that the little one died of sepsis and meningitis, while in order to make such a diagnosis, it would have had to do a lumbar puncture which was not performed, or that would have required at least one blood culture or stool, the results will not be known until 3 or 4 days”.

    Stacy’s death was recorded as: Meningitis.

    It is interesting and extremely sad that this little girl died of an illness that she was vaccinated against just one week before she died. It is obvious from the information that I have from the father that this tiny vulnerable baby was left to suffer in considerable pain, dirty and in distress, whilst the pleas of her parents were ignored.

    Vaccinations are administered to a child based on the age of the child from the day that they are born. Due to the advances in medicine, babies are being saved at an earlier and earlier stage in their development. We know that Stacy was born at approx one month premature, which means that she was given her eight week old vaccinations at just a month old; she was also unwell at the time she was vaccinated. It is my opinion that her small immature immune system could not cope with the onslaught of deadly toxins and chemicals that are in our vaccines today.

    Stacy’s devastated parents are so outraged by what they have discovered since their baby’s death, that they are now asking the world to join them in a worldwide protest. They want the world to hold a global event in memory of Stacy and the many hundreds of children that have been killed or injured by vaccinations worldwide. They feel that vaccine deaths are being covered up and ask the citizens of the world to stand united for one day against vaccine damage. They say:

    We are the parents of Stacy, who died a week after HER first vaccines; we are organizing a global event in honor of Stacy, Nova and all other vaccine victims worldwide. We are summoning every citizen of every country to take to the streets in their own cities, towns and villages: things must now change!

    Remember to invite local journalists, the media and any victims or parents of victims prepared to tell their story. Make placards, banners and signs: UNCENSORED VACCINE INFORMATION, FREEDOM OF CHOICE!

    The event is to be held on the January 20th 2012. If it is not possible for you to attend one of the many protests that are being held, then perhaps you could go along to your local church and light a candle to register your protest at what is happening around the world.

    Sirjacobs and Dupont are right; something radical does need to be done to make the authorities listen to parents

    Vaccine deaths are being reported around the world at an alarming rate. In May 2010 The Times of India (2) reported that 128 deaths had occurred during the previous year and the figure appeared to be rising with each year. Their report suggested that the Indian government was covering up vaccine deaths. Arun Ram reporting for the Times wrote:

    “The government tries to pass on every death as unrelated to vaccine. It sometimes merely does a culture of the vaccine in question. Just because a vaccine is not found to be contaminated, it doesn’t mean the vaccine has not caused the death,” says Dr Puliyel.

    In March 2011 Neil Z miller (3) wrote that in the USA more than 2,000 babies died after receiving pneumococcal and Hib vaccines and yet nothing whatsoever was done. He reported that whilst these vaccines were suspended in Japan after just four deaths, the news of over 2000 deaths in the USA was barely even reported. According to Miller Paul Offit had called the Japanese authorities foolish, saying that the babies probably died of SIDS (Sudden Infant Death Syndrome). In fact he passed their deaths off as anything he could, except the vaccines that is. Miller wrote:

    According to Paul Offit, media spokesperson for the vaccine industry, “the Japanese Ministry of Health was foolish to suspend the Hib and pneumococcal programs.” Offit thinks the deaths were probably caused by SIDS, or underlying conditions, or another cause – anything except the vaccines. Often, children get sick and die by chance.

    Actually, Paul Offit could be right, many of the vaccinated babies could be dying as a result of SIDS because in May 2011 an interesting article hit the internet by storm stating that a study published in the Journal of Human and Experimental Toxicology found that the countries that administered the highest number of vaccines during the first year of life experienced higher infant mortality rates. (4)

    This is not new because studies have been stating that vaccines were causing children to die for many years.

    The Pourcyrous study (5) was the first study to examine the impact of multi-vaccinations on the immature brain. It is clear from the results of this study that the more vaccines a child has, the larger impact the vaccines have on the child’s brain.  Massroor Pourcyrous, MD,  Sheldon B. Korones, MD,  Kristopher L. Arheart PhD,  Henrietta S. Bada, MD studied 239 preterm infants who were given either a single vaccine or multiple vaccines, their results are as follows:

    Abnormal elevation of CRP level occurred in 85% of infants administered multiple vaccines and up to 70% of those given a single vaccine. Overall, 16% of infants had vaccine-associated cardiorespiratory events within 48 hours postimmunization. In logistic regression analysis, abnormal CRP values were associated with multiple vaccines (OR, 15.77; 95% CI 5.10-48.77) and severe intraventricular hemorrhage (IVH) (OR, 2.28; 95% CI 1.02-5.13). Cardiorespiratory events were associated marginally with receipt of multiple injections (OR, 3.62; 95% CI 0.99-13.25) and significantly with gastroesophageal reflux (GER) (OR, 4.76; 95% CI 1.22-18.52).

    This study has had so much impact that it has now being quoted in papers and books on adverse reactions to vaccines and SIDS worldwide.

    As today saw the news that yet another vaccine is to be added to babies vaccine schedule, the Meningitis B vaccine (6), we to ask ourselves how many Stacy’s will it take before action is taken?

    This article has been written in memory of Stacy Sirjacobs and the many hundreds of babies who have lost their life after receiving what the governments tell us are ‘safe vaccines’ (VacTruth, 2012).

    Title: Bedrock Of Vaccination Theory Crumbles As Science Reveals Antibodies Not Necessary To Fight Viruses
    Date: March 27, 2012
    Source:
    Natural News

    Abstract: While the medical, pharmaceutical, and vaccine industries are busy pushing new vaccines for practically every condition under the sun, a new study published in the journal Immunity completely deconstructs the entire vaccination theory. It turns out that the body's natural immune systems, comprised of both innate and adaptive components, work together to ward off disease without the need for antibody-producing vaccines.

    The theory behind vaccines is that they mimic infection by spurring B cells, one of the two major types of white blood cells in the immune system, to produce antibodies as part of the adaptive immune system. It is widely believed that these vaccine-induced antibodies, which are part of the more specific adaptive immune system, teach the immune system how to directly respond to an infection before the body becomes exposed to it.

    But the new research highlights the fact that innate immunity plays a significant role in fighting infections, and is perhaps more important than adaptive immunity at preventing or fighting infections. In tests, adaptive immune system antibodies were shown unable to fight infection by themselves, which in essence debunks the theory that vaccine-induced antibodies serve any legitimate function in preventing or fighting off infection.

    "Our findings contradict the current view that antibodies are absolutely required to survive infection with viruses like VSV (vesicular stomatitis virus), and establish an unexpected function for B cells as custodians of macrophages in antiviral immunity," said Dr. Uldrich H. von Andrian from Harvard Medical School. "It will be important to further dissect the role of antibodies and interferons in immunity against similar viruses that attack the nervous system, such as rabies, West Nile virus, and Encephalitis."

    As explained by Dr. Russell Blaylock in a recent interview with Mike Adams, the Health Ranger, vaccines not only do not work as advertised, but they actually damage the body's innate immunity. Rather than teach the body how to respond to infections, vaccines actually inhibit the immune system's ability to produce TH2-type cytokines, and suppress cellular immunity, which is how the body protects itself against deadly viruses and bacteria.

    So once again, the myth that vaccinations serve any sort of legitimate medical purpose has been deconstructed by breakthrough science. Regardless of whether or not the mainstream medical community wants to admit it, pro-vaccine ideology is increasingly finding itself in the dustheap of outmoded pseudoscience
    (Natural News, 2012).

    Title: Real Or Fake? Pentagon Proposal To Lobotomize ‘Terrorists’ Using Virus
    Date: April 2, 2012
    Source: Prison Planet


    Abstract
    :
    A video on You Tube appears to show a Pentagon briefing in which the idea of lobotomizing terrorists to remove their religious fanaticism using a manufactured virus containing a vaccine is seriously proposed, although debate has raged about whether the clip is authentic or not.

    YouTube Video

    The footage shows a speaker giving a lecture to a handful of attendees and is accompanied by authentic-looking Department of Defense project ID numbers. According to the text on the clip, the lecture took place inside a Pentagon briefing room.

    The speaker discusses how certain people are predisposed to be religious fundamentalists because they have an aggressive VMAT 2 (God) gene which causes them to act on their beliefs in fanatical ways.

    After a member of the audience asks the speaker if the idea is to “by spreading this virus….eliminate individuals who are going on to a bomb fest, who are going into a market and blowing it apart,” the speaker confirms, “by vaccinating them against this, we’ll eliminate this behavior.”

    The question of how to implement the vaccine is answered by the speaker when he responds to the man in the audience, who raises doubts over the feasibility of performing CT scans on suspected terrorists rather than just “putting a bullet in their head”.

    “The virus would immunize against this VMAT 2 gene and that would….essentially turn a fanatic into a normal person, and we think that would have major effects in the Middle East,” states the speaker.

    The audience member then asks, “How do you suggest this can be dispersed, via an aerosol?” – to which the speaker responds, “The present plan and the tests we’ve done so far have used respiratory viruses such as flu and we believe that’s a satisfactory way to get the exposure of the largest part of the population.”

    The speaker confirms that the name of the proposal is “Funvax – the vaccine for religious fundamentalism.”

    Debate over the video’s authenticity has raged over the course of the past year since the video was uploaded to You Tube.

    Skeptics argue that the image of the brain scan used in the lecture, which according to the time stamp on the video took place in June 2005, is actually taken from a 2010 Neurology.org article on a completely different subject. The two images are also clearly the same brain, whereas the speaker in the clip claims they are from two different people.

    The other point made by skeptics to illustrate that the clip is a hoax is the claim that the audio is not in time with the speakers on the video. This is a weaker argument – the audio would not be in perfect sync on a You Tube clip anyway, plus the back and forth exchanges between the two speakers allied with their hand gestures do appear to be authentic, in that the audience member is expressing genuine shock at the scope of the idea.

    The only information about ‘Funvax’ comes from a single source, a website run by “supporters” of an individual named Joey Lambardi. There is no other confirmation or discussion of ‘Funvax’ from any official source or mainstream website.

    Whatever the true providence of the video clip, the fact that brain eating vaccines which alter brain chemistry to perform a de facto lobotomy on the subject have been developed are now being promoted to the general public is a fact.

    Back in 2010, Dr Robert Sapolsky, professor of neuroscience at Stanford University in California, announced that he had created a vaccine to impose a state of “focused calm” by altering brain chemistry.

    The proposals ominously hark back to George Lucas’ 1971 dystopian chiller THX 1138, in which the population is controlled and subjugated through the use of special drugs to suppress emotion.

    Feeling stress, getting angry, expressing emotion and displaying passion are all innate, natural and vital aspects of human behavior. Reacting with stress to dangerous or uncomfortable situations is an essential and healthy response, and is one shared by just about every living thing on the planet.

    However, scientists are now telling us that getting angry, upset and passionate is abnormal and needs to be “treated” through a fresh dose of pharmaceutical drugs and injections that will virtually lobotomize us into submissive compliance.

    Likewise, the notion that populations should be unwillingly vaccinated to lobotomize them of their religious beliefs is also clearly an abomination against free will and represents the ultimate tool of a scientific dictatorship (Prison Planet, 2012).

    Title: Big Surprise - Whooping Cough Spreads Mainly Through Vaccinated Populations
    Date: April 17, 2012
    Source:
    Mercola

    Abstract: In 2010, the largest outbreak of whooping cough in over 50 years reportedly occurred in California.

    Around that same time, a scare campaign was launched in the California by Pharma-funded medical trade associations, state health officials and national media targeting people opting out of using pertussis vaccine, falsely accusing them of causing the then-current whooping cough outbreak.

    But new research released last month paints a very different picture than the one being spread by the media.

    In fact, the study showed that 81 percent of 2010 California whooping cough cases in people under the age of 18 occurred in those who were fully up to date on the whooping cough vaccine.

    81 Percent of Whooping Cough Cases Occurred in People Who Were Fully Vaccinated
    CDC data shows 84 percent of children under the age of 3 have received at least FOUR DTaP shots—which is the acellular pertussis vaccine that was approved in the United States in 1996—yet, despite this high vaccination rate, whooping cough still keeps circulating among both the vaccinated and unvaccinated.

    More likely than not, the vaccine provides very little if any protection, and this was evidenced very clearly in a study published in Clinical Infectious Diseases.i

    Researchers reviewed data on every patient who tested positive for pertussis between March and October 2010 at the Kaiser Permanente Medical Center in San Rafael, California.

    Out of these 132 patients:

    1. 81 percent were fully up to date on the whooping cough vaccine
    2. 8 percent had never been vaccinated
    3. 11 percent had received at least one shot, but not the entire recommended series

    What’s wrong with this picture? Could it be that children and adults, who have received all the government-recommended pertussis shots, can still get the disease? Yes, of course. And this study suggests they may in fact be more likelyto get the diseases than unvaccinated populations. Researchers noted:

    “Despite widespread childhood vaccination against Bordetella pertussis, disease remains prevalent. It has been suggested that acellular vaccine may be less effective than previously believed. Our data suggests that the current schedule of acellular pertussis vaccine doses is insufficient to prevent outbreaks of pertussis.”

    That is clearly stating the obvious, as B. pertussis whooping cough is a cyclical disease and natural increases tend to occur every 4-5 years no matter how high the vaccination rates in a population using DPT or DTaP vaccines on a widespread basis. Whole cell DPT vaccines used in the U.S. from the 1950’s until the late 1990’s were estimated to be 63 to 94 percent effective and studies showed that vaccine-acquired immunity fell to about 40 percent after seven years.

    In the recent DTaP vaccine study, researchers  noted the vaccine’s effectiveness was only 41 percent among 2- to 7-year-olds and a dismal 24 percent among those aged 8-12. With this shockingly low rate of DTaP vaccine effectiveness, the questionable solution that public health officials have come up with is to declare that everybody has to get three primary shots and three follow-up booster shotsjust to get the vaccine to give long-lasting protection—if any protection is provided at all.

    Whooping Cough Vaccine Protection Fades in Three Years
    The featured study also suggests that the acellular pertussis vaccine loses much of its effectiveness after just three years. This is much faster than previously believed, and could also help explain the recent whooping cough outbreaks in the U.S.

    Unfortunately, stacking on additional booster shots is likely to make matters worse rather than better, especially in light of the fact that the mass use of existing pertussis vaccines has already led to vaccine-resistant strains that are still evolving and could become much more virulent.

    The new mutation, which some researchers are calling "P3," is a strain that produces more pertussis toxin (PT).

    Pertussis toxin is the part of B. pertussis bacteria that is most responsible for the neurological complications of both pertussis disease and DPT and DtaP pertussis vaccines, and is also most responsible for stimulating an immune response. The acellular pertussis vaccines, which were developed and tested in the late 1980's and early 1990's, do not include the mutated strain.

    Another reason why whooping cough cannot be entirely eradicated is the fact that there's another Bordetella organism – parapertussis – that can also cause whooping cough. The symptoms of B. parapertussis, while often milder, can look exactly like B. pertussis, but doctors rarely recognize or test for parapertussis. And, there is NO vaccine for it.

    One difference between recovering from B. pertussis whooping cough and getting the vaccine is that recovery from whooping cough confers a naturally-acquired immunity that is stronger and longer lasting than the artificial immunity induced by the vaccine. Vaccination requires more and more booster doses to try to extend the artificial vaccine immunity.

    Many Doctors Now Pushing Ineffective “Cocooning” Whooping Cough Vaccines
    The Tdap vaccine, which is recommended for children aged 7 years and older, as well as adults, is also a combination vaccine that is supposed to protect against tetanus, diphtheria and whooping cough (pertussis). The American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) is now directing all physicians, particularly pediatricians, to offer Tdap vaccine to parents and close family members of babies under age 2 months, who are too young to receive a pertussis-containing vaccine themselves. (The other vaccine being promoted to parents and close contacts of babies is the flu vaccine).

    Known as "cocooning," this controversial practice is being promoted by the AAP and government health officials as a way of protecting babies from whooping cough and other infectious diseases like influenza by vaccinating their parents and other adult caregivers. However, there is little evidence to show that this works! In fact, research from Canada showed just the opposite.

    The Canadian study investigated how many parents would need to be vaccinated in order to prevent infant hospitalizations and deaths from pertussis using the cocoon strategy, and the results were dismal. They found the number needed to vaccinate (NNV) for parental immunization was at least 1 million to prevent 1 infant death, approximately 100,000 for ICU admission, and >10,000 for hospitalization. Researchers concluded:

    "... the parental cocoon program is inefficient and resource intensive for the prevention of serious outcomes in early infancy."

    There are Risks Attached to the Whooping Cough Vaccine
    Whooping cough can be serious, especially for newborns and babies, whose tiny airways can become clogged with the sticky mucus produced by the toxins in B. pertussis bacteria. These babies can suffer life-threatening breathing problems that require hospitalization and use of suctioning and re-hydration therapies. However, the vast majority of children and adults get through a bout with whooping cough without complications and it is important for them to get proper nutrition, hydration and rest to support the healing process.

    Similarly, while some children and adults get pertussis-containing vaccines and experience no complications, others do suffer serious reactions, injuries, or have died after getting vaccinated. According to Barbara Loe Fisher, co-founder of the National Vaccine Information Center (NVIC):

    "Of all the vaccines which have been routinely used by children in the past century, the brain damaging effects of the pertussis (whooping cough) portion of DPT vaccine is among the most well documented in the scientific literature.

    Created in 1912, the crude pertussis vaccine basically consisted of B. pertussis bacteria killed with heat, preserved with formaldehyde, and injected into children. In the early 1940's, aluminum was added as an adjuvant and later the mercury preservative, thimerosal, was added when pertussis was combined with diphtheria and tetanus vaccines to create DPT. Pertussis vaccine was never studied in large clinical trials before being given to children in the first half of the 20th century or after it was combined into DPT and recommended for mass use by the American Academy of Pediatrics in 1947."

    Children who are particularly high-risk for brain injury or death after getting a pertussis-containing vaccine (DPT, DTaP or Tdap) include those who have suffered previous vaccine reactions, such as:

    1. High fever
    2. High pitched screaming or persistent crying
    3. Convulsions (with or without fever)
    4. Collapse/shock (also known as hypo-tonic/hypo-responsive episodes)
    5. Brain inflammation and encephalopathy

    Most of the adverse effects are believed to occur from the effects of the pertussis toxin itself, which is one of the most lethal toxins in nature. It's a well-known neurotoxin that is so reliable for inducing brain inflammation and brain damage that it's used to deliberately induce experimental autoimmune encephalomyelitis (EAE) in lab animals.

    In the video profile of pertussis vaccine injury below, Barbara Loe Fisher interviews a Houston family with a history of vaccine reactions that spans three generations. Now, a 12-year-old child in the family has become permanently disabled from a reaction to the DTaP vaccine that was given to her, along with 6 other vaccines, at age 15 months.

    Either way, getting whooping cough or getting a pertussis vaccination entails a risk. But, remember, the vaccine carries with it two risks: the risk of a serious side effect AND the risk that the vaccine won't work at all or will only work for a short period of time. What happened to this family is a potent reminder of just how important it is to make well-informed decisions about vaccinations.

    What You Can Do to Make a Difference
    While it seems "old-fashioned," the only truly effective actions you can take to protect the right to informed consent to vaccination and expand your rights under the law to make voluntary vaccine choices, is to get personally involved with your state legislators and the leaders in your community.

    THINK GLOBALLY, ACT LOCALLY.
    Mass vaccination policies are made at the federal level but vaccine laws are made at the state level, and it is at the state level where your action to protect your vaccine choice rights will have the greatest impact.

    Signing up to be a user of NVIC's free online Advocacy Portal at www.NVICAdvocacy.org gives you access to practical, useful information to help you become an effective vaccine choice advocate in your own community. You will get real-time Action Alerts about what you can do if there are threats to vaccine exemptions in your state. With the click of a mouse or one touch on a Smartphone screen you will be put in touch with YOUR elected representatives so you can let them know how you feel and what you want them to do. Plus, when national vaccine issues come up, you will have all the information you need to make sure your voice is heard.

    NVIC is using the Advocacy Portal to warn citizens about legislative threats to strip vaccine exemptions from state vaccine laws. NVIC staff and volunteers are on the ground in Vermont, California, Arizona and other states training activists to fight the wealthy and powerful Pharma/Medical Trade lobby that is trying to eliminate the religious and conscientious or philosophical belief exemption to vaccination in America.

    Watch a Public Service Message about a bill now threatening the personal belief exemption to vaccination in California.

    So please, as your first step, sign up for the NVIC Advocacy Portal.

    Contact Your Elected Officials
    It is so important for you to reach out and make sure your concerns get on the radar screen of the leaders and opinion makers in your community, especially the politicians you elect and are directly involved in making vaccine laws in your state. These are yourelected representatives, so you have a right and a responsibility to let them know what's really happening in your life and the lives of people you know when it comes to vaccine mandates. Be sure to share the "real life" experiences that you or people you know have had with vaccination.

    Internet Resources
    I also encourage you to visit the following web pages on the National Vaccine Information Center (NVIC) website atwww.NVIC.org:

    1. NVIC Memorial for Vaccine Victims: View descriptions and photos of children and adults, who have suffered vaccine reactions, injuries and deaths. If you or your child experiences an adverse vaccine event, please consider posting and sharing your story here.

    2. If You Vaccinate, Ask 8 Questions: Learn how to recognize vaccine reaction symptoms and prevent vaccine injuries.

    3. Vaccine Freedom Wall: View or post descriptions of harassment by doctors or state officials for making independent vaccine choices.

    Find a Doctor Who will Listen to Your Concerns
    If your pediatrician or doctor refuses to provide medical care to you or your child unless you agree to get vaccines you don't want, I strongly encourage you to have the courage to find another doctor. Harassment, intimidation, and refusal of medical care is becoming the modus operandi of the medical establishment in an effort to punish those patients and parents, who become truly educated about health and vaccination and want to make vaccine choices instead of being forced to follow risky one-size-fits-all vaccine policies.

    If you are treated with disrespect or are harassed in any way by a doctor (or government official), do not engage in an unproductive argument. You may want to contact an attorney, your elected state representatives or local media if you or your child are threatened.

    However, there is hope.

    At least 15 percent of young doctors recently polled admit that they're starting to adopt a more individualized approach to vaccinations in direct response to the vaccine safety concerns of parents. It is good news that there is a growing number of smart young doctors, who prefer to work as partners with parents in making personalized vaccine decisions for children, including delaying vaccinations or giving children fewer vaccines on the same day or continuing to provide medical care for those families, who decline use of one or more vaccines.

    So take the time to locate and connect with a doctor, who treats you with compassion and respect and is willing to work with you to do what is right for your child (Mercola, 2012).

    Title: Vaccine Bombshell: Baby Monkeys Given Standard Doses Of Popular Vaccines Develop Autism Symptoms
    Date: May 6, 2012
    Source: Natural News

    Abstract: If vaccines play absolutely no role in the development of childhood autism, a claim made by many medical authorities today, then why are some of the most popular vaccines commonly administered to children demonstrably causing autism in animal primates? This is the question many people are now asking after a recent study conducted by scientists at theUniversity of Pittsburgh(UP) in Pennsylvania revealed that many of the infant monkeys given standard doses of childhood vaccines as part of the new research developed autism symptoms.

    For their analysis, Laura Hewitson and her colleagues at UP conducted the type of proper safety research on typical childhood vaccination schedules that the U.S.Centers for Disease Control and Prevention(CDC) should have conducted -- but never has -- for such regimens. And what this brave team discovered was groundbreaking, as it completely deconstructs the mainstream myth that vaccines are safe and pose no risk of autism.

    Presented at theInternational Meeting for Autism Research(IMFAR) in London, England, the findings revealed that young macaque monkeys given the typical CDC-recommended vaccination schedule from the 1990s, and in appropriate doses for the monkeys' sizes and ages, tended to develop autism symptoms. Their unvaccinated counterparts, on the other hand, developed no such symptoms, which points to a strong connection between vaccines and autism spectrum disorders.

    Included in the mix were several vaccines containing the toxic additive Thimerosal, a mercury-based compound that has been phased out of some vaccines, but is still present in batch-size influenza vaccines and a few others. Also administered was the controversial measles, mumps, and rubella (MMR) vaccine, which has been linked time and time again to causing autism and various other serious, and often irreversible, health problems in children (
    http://www.greenhealthwatch.com)

    "This research underscores the critical need for more investigation into immunizations, mercury, and the alterations seen in autistic children," said Lyn Redwood, director ofSafeMinds, a public safety group working to expose the truth about vaccines and autism. "SafeMinds calls for large scale, unbiased studies that look at autism medical conditions and the effects of vaccines given as a regimen."

    Vaccine oversight needs to be taken from CDC and given to independent agency, says vaccine safety advocate

    Adding to the sentiment, Theresa Wrangham, president ofSafeMindscalled out the CDC for failing to require proper safety studies of its recommended vaccination schedules. Unlike all other drugs, which must at least undergo a basic round of safety testing prior to approval and recommendation, vaccinations and vaccine schedules in particular do not have to be proven safe or effective before hitting the market.

    "The full implications of this primate study await publication of the research in a scientific journal," said Wrangham. "But we can say that it demonstrates how the CDC evaded their responsibility to investigate vaccine safety questions. Vaccine safety oversight should be removed from the CDC and given to an independent agency" (Natural News, 2012)

    Title: Vaccinated Children Have Up To 500% More Disease Than Unvaccinated Children
    Date: June 19, 2012
    Source:
    NaturalNews

    Abstract: 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) (NaturalNews, 2012)

    Title: Vaccines Backfire: Veterinary Vaccines Found To Combine Into New Infectious Viruses
    Date: July 12, 2012
    Source:
    Science Daily

    Abstract: Research from the University of Melbourne has shown that two different vaccine viruses- used simultaneously to control the same condition in chickens- have combined to produce new infectious viruses, prompting early response from Australia's veterinary medicines regulator.

    The vaccines were used to control infectious laryngotracheitis (ILT), an acute respiratory disease occurring in chickens worldwide. ILT can have up to 20% mortality rate in some flocks and has a significant economic and welfare impact in the poultry industry.

    The research found that when two different ILT vaccine strains were used in the same populations, they combined into two new strains (a process known as recombination), resulting in disease outbreaks.

    Neither the ILT virus or the new strains can be transmitted to humans or other animals, and do not pose a food safety risk.

    The study was led by Dr Joanne Devlin, Professor Glenn Browning and Dr Sang-Won Lee and colleagues at the Asia-Pacific Centre for Animal Health at the University of Melbourne and NICTA's Victoria Research Laboratory and is published July 13, 2012] in the journal Science.

    Dr Devlin said the combining of live vaccine virus strains outside of the laboratory was previously thought to be highly unlikely, but this study shows that it is possible and has led to disease outbreaks in poultry flocks.

    "We alerted the Australian Pesticide and Veterinary Medicines Authority (APVMA) to our findings and they are now working closely with our research team, vaccine registrants and the poultry industry to determine both short and long term regulatory actions," she said.

    "Short-term measures include risk assessment of all live virus vaccines currently registered by the APVMA in regard to the risk of recombination and could include changes to product labels, which may result in restrictions on the use of two vaccines of different origins in the one animal population."

    The ILT vaccines are 'live attenuated vaccines', which means that the virus has some disease-causing factors removed but the immune system still recognises the virus to defend against a real infection.

    "Live vaccines are used throughout the world to control ILT in poultry. For over 40 years the vaccines used in Australia were derived from an Australian virus strain. But following a vaccine shortage another vaccine originating from Europe was registered in 2006 and rapidly became widely used," Dr Devlin said.

    "Shortly after the introduction of the European strain of vaccine, two new strains of ILT virus were found to be responsible for most of the outbreaks of disease in New South Wales and Victoria. So we sought to examine the origin of these two new strains."

    The team sequenced all of the genes (the genome) of the two vaccines used in Australia, and the two new outbreak strains of the virus. Following bioinformatic analysis on the resulting DNA sequence, in conjunction with Dr John Markham at NICTA's Victoria Research Laboratory, they found that the new disease-causing strains were combinations of the Australian and European origin vaccine strains.

    "Comparisons of the vaccine strains and the new recombinant strains have shown that both the recombinant strains cause more severe disease, or replicate to a higher level than the parent vaccine strains that gave rise to them," Dr Lee said.

    Professor Glenn Browning said recombination was a natural process that can occur when two viruses infect the same cell at the same time.

    "While recombination has been recognised as a potential risk associated with live virus vaccines for many years, the likelihood of it happening in viruses like this in the field has been thought to be so low that it was considered to be very unlikely to lead to significant problems," he said.

    "Our studies have shown that the risk of recombination between different vaccine strains in the field is significant as two different recombinant viruses arose within a year. We also demonstrated that the consequences of such recombination can be very severe, as the new viruses have been responsible for the deaths of thousands of Australian poultry."

    "The study suggests that regulation of live attenuated vaccines for all species needs to take into account the real potential for vaccine viruses to combine. Measures such as those now being taken for the ILT vaccines will need to be implemented" (Science Daily, 2012).

    Title: Scientists Discover Two Different Vaccines Combined To Create New Virus Strains
    Date: July 13, 2012
    Source:
    News.com.au

    Abstract: Two different vaccines used to control infectious disease in chickens have combined to create new virus strains.

    The herpes virus caused 33 outbreaks of disease and death in farmed chickens on the outskirts of Sydney and Melbourne in 2008. 

    University of Melbourne lecturer Dr Joanne Devlin said the disease emerged shortly after a new vaccine was introduced.

    She said researchers were "surprised" to find the new strain was formed by the "recombination" of two strains administered in separate vaccines.

    Researchers at the Asia-Pacific Centre for Animal Health in the University checked the DNA sequence of the new virus against the strains of the virus in the vaccines.

    These are called live attenuated vaccines because they contain live but weakened forms of a virus that causes disease. 


    She said the new virus strains that killed up to 17 per cent of the birds on the farm were "more virulent and never before seen in the field". 

    The research is published todaynts Fridaynte in the international journal Science

    Chickens are routinely vaccinated against the disease called infectious laryngotracheitis virus (ILTV). Three vaccines are currently available in Australia. 

    Commenting on the research, Professor Ian Gust said it was a "very interesting finding'' but the administration of herpes vaccines to chickens was vastly different to that in humans. 

    He said that while some live attenuated vaccines were used in humans, it would be "extremely unusual"' for a doctor to use different strains of the same virus in succession
    (News.com.au, 2012)
    .

    Title: A Parent’s Guide: What To Do If Your Child Dies After Vaccination
    Date: August 21, 2012
    Source:
    VacTruth.com

    Abstract: Over the years various medical doctors, attorneys, and parents have contacted the authors of this Guide seeking information about medical tests that could indicate a causal relationship between vaccines and their ingredients and the severe reactions in previously healthy infants, toddlers, or teenagers, many of whom succumbed after either: 1) receiving vaccination(s), or 2) experiencing protracted adverse events due to vaccines.

    Since these requests are coming more frequently, apparently there is a need for such information. This Guidewas vetted for accuracy, including omission of relevant information needed in the attempt to determine whether a child died as a result of neurotoxins and/or hazardous chemicals in vaccines. Some are listed in Vaccine Excipient & Media Summary / Excipients Included in US Licensed Vaccines: E-1 thru E-5; Vaccine-Production Media: E-6 & E-7 at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s http://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/pubs/pinkbook/downloads/appendices/B/excipient-table-2.pdf.

    Another source of vaccine chemical ingredients is each vaccine’s package insert, which can be accessed at U.S. FDA Vaccines, Blood & Biologics website at

    http://www.fda.gov/BiologicsBloodVaccines/vaccines/ApprovedProducts/ucm093830.htm

    With the current practice of injecting several multi-valent vaccines [often as many as 9 separate vaccines] into an infant or toddler during the same office visit, some recipients’ central nervous systems (CNS) apparently become overloaded and/or the brain suffers dramatic injury from multiple neurotoxins and other toxic chemicals crossing the blood-brain barrier (BBB); others experience severe allergic reactions to one or more of the vaccine components. Encephalopathy or anaphylaxis can occur with fatal results.

    Conventional ‘wisdom’ claims vaccines are not harmful. However, it is becoming increasingly apparent this is not the case for all recipients. The information and tests discussed in this Guide can potentially help document vaccine damage, if parents and their attorneys secure pathologists who will perform those tests.

    PARENTS’ INFORMATION
    Parents should realize their gut instincts most often are correct, especially about their child whom they have been taking care of since birth. No one knows a child better than his/her mother. Ideally, parents will have documented any new health conditions their child experienced after receiving vaccinations, e.g., screaming fits, seizures, fevers, etc. That documentation will be most helpful later on.

    There is nothing a parent can experience that is more traumatic than the death of a child. But, when a death tragically occurs shortly after vaccination, time is of the essence. Usually, the coroner is appointed by government authorities. Parents need to know they have every right to request the pathologist perform post-mortem blood and tissue assays/analyses, and to preserve the samples and data they reveal. Parents may need an attorney’s legal help and/or intervention to get the proper tests performed. Nevertheless, parents have every legal right to request an autopsy be performed, including certain tests looking for toxins, similar to what is done in drug overdose deaths. Parents also have the right to request storage of samples for future tests that are developed as new scientific discoveries are made.

    Grieving parents must remember this is a time to rely on loving family and friends to help provide support in their quest to ascertain the child’s cause of death, which can be determined in most cases via proper post-mortem examination.

    Parents must remember physicians and emergency room personnel are typically not trained to recognize adverse reactions from vaccines. Therefore, it is common practice for child abuse/neglect, or Shaken Baby Syndrome(SBS) legal charges to be filed against parents of children who die from vaccine damage to the brain, especially if there are no visible trauma marks on the child’s body. That’s when certain blood tests can be most helpful disproving such allegations. This Guide tells which tests should be performed as soon as possible after death to disprove SBS.

    ATTORNEY INFORMATION
    Attorneys are not prepared, in most cases, to deal with vaccine damage cases. Tort law does not apply to vaccine damages. The National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986 (Public Law 99-660) created the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program under which claims must be filed. However, the more medical documentation, e.g., post-mortem test results, attorneys can present with their client’s claim, the more likely the case you file will get attention from the Special Masters of the United States Court of Federal Claims. Various post-mortem tests can disprove SBS, SIDS, etc., which this Guide discusses later. Attorneys should report the death by filing a VAERS report to the HHS at 
    http://vaers.hhs.gov/helpinstructions

    CORONER / PATHOLOGIST INFORMATION
    As every pathologist knows, it is important to ascertain cause of death. Chemicals, either legal drugs/medications (prescription drugs and their amounts in the body) or street drugs commonly are assayed. Since there are numerous neurotoxins, heavy metals (Hg, Al in 4 formulations), even recombinant DNA (rDNA), and industrial use chemicals in the formulation of vaccines, it should be incumbent upon the pathologist to perform extensive panels/assays of both post-mortem blood and key organ tissue samples, e.g., brain, liver, spleen, heart, and small intestine.

    PLOS (“public library of science”) online published the Ken Tsumiyama, Yumi Miyazaki, Shunichi Shiozawa paper “Self-Organized Criticality Theory of Autoimmunity” [1] wherein their

    Conclusions 
    Systemic autoimmunity appears to be the inevitable consequence of over-stimulating the host’s immune ‘system’ by repeated immunization with antigen, to the levels that surpass system’s self-organized criticality.

    The Tsumiyama, etal paper contains information pathologists may find helpful.

    [1] http://www.plosone.org/article/info:doi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0008382

    Qiagen’s Sample & Assay Technology is available at www.qiagen.com with ordering information, Fax numbers, and technical support phone numbers for the following countries: Australia, Austria, Belgium, Canada, China, Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, Hong Kong, Ireland, Italy, Japan, Luxembourg, The Netherlands, Norway, South Korea, Sweden, Switzerland, UK, USA.

    Qiagen offers Gentra® Puregene® Handbook Second Ed. 2007–For purification of archive-quality DNA from:human whole blood, bone marrow, buffy coat, buccal cells, body fluids, cultured cells, tissue, mouse tail, yeast, bacteria

    Infant/Toddler Vaccines Autopsy Tests

    • Test for CRP (C-reactive protein: if inflammation is high, that would indicate vaccines were to blame as a small infant or toddler could not generate such results) This would indicate severe brain inflammation.
    • Test for liver enzymes
    • Test for heavy metals, especially Hg and Al in blood and brain tissue
    • Test for formaldehyde and Formalin–in particular–which would come from vaccines.  Even though the body manufactures a little formaldehyde, large amounts would implicate formaldehyde, or Formalin, especially in vaccines.
    • If brain tissue is taken, check for Hg and Al, which would indicate those metals crossed the blood brain barrier and may have been the precipitating factor in the child’s demise, as they are potent neurotoxins and can cause encephalopathy.

    Run a cytokine panel: 

    1. Interleukin-1 beta (IL-1β) – IL-1beta is one of the key mediators of the inflammatory response to physical stress. 
    2. Interleukin-6 (IL-6)
    3. Interleukin-8 (IL-8)
    4. Tumor necrosis factor alpha (TNF-αTNF-α is a growth factor for immune cells and osteoclasts, the cells that break down bone. 
    5. Fibrinogen 
    6. Vitamin C assay 
    7. Titer levels on all the vaccines. If they are sky high, that could make a case for molecular mimicry causing death.

    Brain Tissue Samples Preserved as Paraffin Blocks

    • Brainstem: Pons, Medulla, Midbrain
    • Hippocampus
    • Cerebellum

    HPV Gardasil® Vaccines for Teenage Girls and Boys
    Each of the 3 injections contains 225 ug of aluminium hydroxyphosphate sulfate, plus sodium borate (a pesticide), and polysorbate 80, an emulsifier linked with anaphylaxis, convulsions, collapse. Post-mortem blood and tissue findings should prevail in court if these substances were in the system at the time of death, since vaccines are one of the primary sources.

    ADDITIONAL INFORMATION

    • Parents should construct a retrospective timeline of the child’s last week before vaccination, e.g., did child have a fever, cold, asthma, allergy incident, influenza, or other health anomaly, plus a timeline of events occurring after vaccination.
    • Were those events reported to the MD/pediatrician who administered the vaccine and what was the advice given?
    • Before administering the vaccinations to the child, did the MD inquire as to the child’s general health at the time of the vaccination?
    • Parents need to obtain a complete copy of their child’s medical records as soon as possible and keep it for their records.
    • Parents need to make sure a report is filed with the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System.
    • When a vaccine is administered to your child, make sure the doctor/nurse records the vaccine lot number and expiration date on your child’s medical records.

    Note: Children should not be given vaccinations if there is any immune response manifesting, e.g., seasonal allergies, food allergies, common cold, flu symptoms, etc.

    SHAKEN BABY SYNDROME
    Were parents questioned about or charged with Shaken Baby Syndrome? If so, a Bone Density Test can prove/disprove SBS. See this very well documented paper regarding that.

    Matthew B. Seeley, JD, paper “Unexplained Fractures in Infants and Child Abuse: The Case for Requiring Bone-Density Testing Before Convicting Caretakers,” published in the Brigham Young University Law ReviewDec. 20, 2011.

    Part 1:

    http://www.vaccinationcouncil.org/2012/02/05/bone-density-test-can-disprove-shaken-baby-syndrome-by-catherine-frompovich/

    Part 2:

    http://www.vaccinationcouncil.org/2012/02/09/bone-density-shaken-baby-syndrome-part-2-by-catherine-j-frompovich/

    This Guide will be updated periodically as pathologists and MDs report back to us what they feel is necessary to ascertain cause of death revolving around vaccine issues (VacTruth.com, 2012)

    Title: Unveiling The Culprit – Is Foreign DNA Contamination The Autistic Villain Behind Biologic Vaccine Injuries?
    Date: September 2, 2012
    Source:
    Holy Hormones

    Abstract: Foreign DNA is a term most medical consumers are not aware of. However, common sense alone raises questions about the dangers of foreign DNA – otherwise known as recombinant DNA. The American Biologic Safety Association (ABSA) has classified recombinant DNA a biohazard and has outlined specific directives over the handling of such contaminants.1.

    According to a supporting document, written by the Coalition of Vaccine Safety “…The presence of dormant and relict viral sequences in the human and other animal genomes has been known for at least 20 years.These include human retroviral sequences that have been identified in live viral vaccines grown in human cells. 2.

    “Victoria and colleagues have identified the contamination of live viral vaccines for use in healthy children, with viral nucleic acids; the findings have since been confirmed by the vaccine manufacturers and the data reported to the FDA. Contaminating nucleic acids include retroviral sequences from the producer chicken and primate cells. Specifically, Avian leucosis virus (ALV) was present as RNA in viral particles while simian retrovirus (SRV) was present as genetically defective DNA. Rotarix, an orally administered rotavirus vaccine, contained nucleic acids from porcine circovirus-1 (PCV1), virus. Since this report, a second rotavirus vaccine (RotaTeq) has been shown to contain nucleic acids from both PCV1 and PCV2, a pathogen in pigs that is associated with wasting and immunodeficiency. The circumstances in which PCV2 induces disease are discussed below.“3.

    The Center for the Biology of Chronic Disease (CBCD),* publisher of Dr. Hanan Polansky’s the Purplebook Microcompetition with Foreign DNA and the Origin of Chronic Disease explains how foreign DNA fragments can cause many major diseases without damaging (mutating) the human DNA. The book has been read by more than 5,000 scientists around the world, and has been reviewed in more than 20 leading scientific journals.  The theory explains the underlying cause of many major diseases and shows how dormant viruses actually can cause disease while still latent.

    Dr. Polansky discovered that foreign DNA fragments called N-boxes can cause disease. When these foreign DNA fragments enter the body (naturally, or artificially, like through an injection of a vaccine or other treatments), they end up in the cell’s nucleus, where they attract scarce genetic resources. The “microcompetition” between the foreign N-boxes and the human N-boxes cause the human genes to malfunction, which, in turn, can lead to disease.

    In fact, when approached about the HPV rDNA contamination found in Gardasil® – Dr. Polansky agreed that the contaminant should not be there. According to Polansky – the potentially harmful contaminant is part of the faulty biologic medicine manufacturing process that is unable to filter out all foreign DNA plasmids and therefore the particles were suspected to be present in all biologic medicines on the market.

    Is the Autism Epidemic Linked to Foreign DNA Particles in the MMR II Vaccine?
    In April of this year, the CBCD published a press release4.encouraging the CDC to study Polansky’s Microcompetition Theorysince foreign DNA has also been found in Merck & Co.’s MMR II vaccine.5. The vaccine package insert (available for download at the FDA’s web site) shows that fetal cell line Wistar RA 27/3, fetal cell line WI-38, and genetically engineered human albumin are all used in the vaccine.

    The CBCD believes that a better understanding of the theory – lauded by many scientists and researchers at NIH, and other esteemed universities and organizations may lead to better policies to curb the Autism epidemic. In a recent CDC report that epidemic has increased by 78% since 2007.

    Infants 12 months of age or older, are inoculated with the MMR II vaccine with a second dose usually given around age four or five right before entry to school. According to the CBCD, this is also usually the time that the majority of Autism diagnoses are made.

    The release goes on to state:

    The CBCD believes that the current purification processes cannot completely filter all foreign DNA plasmids used in the process of manufacturing the MMR II vaccine. Therefore, some foreign DNA fragments end up being injected into infants.

    “The MMR II vaccine is contaminated with human DNA from the cell line in which the rubella virus is grown. This human DNA could be the cause of the spikes in incidence. An additional increased spike in incidence of autism occurred in 1995 when the chicken pox vaccine was grown in human fetal tissue,” wrote Dr. Helen Ratajczak, Ph.D. in support of this belief. She published two papers regarding this subject in the Journal of Immunotoxicology. (Merck and Co. Inc., 2001; Breuer, 2003)

    However, it appears that the CDC and FDA are aware of the problem with vaccines. In June of 2001, a paper was published in Emerging Infectious Diseases entitled: “Adventitious Agents and Vaccines” stating that:

    “Many novel vaccines are produced in animal cell substrates, and emerging infectious diseases may theoretically be transmitted from animals to humans through these vaccines. The challenge of identifying potential adventitious agents in vaccines closely parallels the challenge of identifying the agents causing particular emerging infectious diseases.” 6.

    Dormant HPV Infections the Silent Culprit
    Although the FDA asserts that the foreign DNA fragments found in Gardasil® poses no risk, the CBCD disagrees.  Their research has led them to believe that HPV has the ability to establish a chronic, dormant (latent) infection and it those chronic infections that can potentially lead to 
    cancer.

    A recent study entitled “Prevalence of Oral HPV Infection in the United States, 2009 – 2010” that was published in the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) reported that the HPV virus was found in the mouths of 7% of study participants. 5,600 people participated in the study. Oral HPV was found in men more than in women.

    The authors of the study wrote, ‘The prevalence of oral HPV infection among men and women aged 14 to 69 years in the United States is approximately 7%… Infection with HPV-16, (a specific type of HPV most associated with cancer) was detected in 1% of men and women, corresponding to an estimated 2.13 million infected individuals in the United States.’

    In essence, according to the study, 2.13 million people who don’t have symptoms now, and don’t even know they are infected, could develop cancer due to their HPV infection. 7.

    Now add in the rDNA factor and one has to wonder at the mechanisms of action that are actually going on in the body.  Dormant DNA – potentially becoming stimulated by the vaccine designed to prevent the chronic infection leading to cervical and other HPV-related cancers – with a mix of rDNA bound to aluminum now circulating in the blood and targeting the weakened areas of the body.

    HPV rDNA Particles found in Postmortem Inquest of New Zealand Girl
    In August, Dr Sin Hang Lee, a pathologist on the medical staff at Connecticut’s Milford Hospital testified about the discovery of HPV DNA fragments in post-mortem samples of her blood and spleen  6 months after Gardasil®® vaccination at the postmortem inquest of Jasmine Renata, a New Zealand teenager who died in her sleep.8.

    Dr. Lee’s testimony stated:

    “The finding of these foreign DNA fragments in the post-mortem samples six months after vaccination indicates that some of the residual DNA fragments from the viral gene or plasmid injected with Gardasil®have been protected from degradation in the form of DNA-aluminum complexes in the macrophages; or via integration into the human genome.

    Undegraded viral and plasmid DNA fragments are known to activate macrophages, causing them to release tumor necrosis factor, a myocardial depressant which can induce lethal shock in animals and humans.”

    Although Dr. Lee’s discovery cannot directly tie the rDNA to the girl’s death, the probable mechanism of action does exist since all other ‘cause of death’ scenarios have been ruled out.

    According to Dr. Lee, Gardasil® contains a genetically engineered recombinant HPV DNA inserted into yeast cells. rDNA behaves differently than natural HPV DNA which does not stay in the blood stream for a long period of time.

    Once a segment of recombinant DNA is inserted into a human cell, the consequences are hard to predict. It may be in the cell temporarily or stay there forever, with or without causing a mutation. Now the host cell contains human DNA as well as genetically engineered viral DNA. 9.

    War of the DNA
    The most frightening aspect of all is that government health agencies do not have the testing nor do they have understanding as to what happens when a recombinant DNA particle infects a cell with ‘normal’ DNA. What are the mechanisms of action that determine who wins the DNA wars? What if the normal ‘DNA’ loses? Are the skyrocketing rates of autism and the increasing Post-Gardasil and Post-Cervarix Syndromes examples of DNA gone bad?

    Even more frightening is that scientists do not know how to isolate or even remove the foreign DNA particles from the body. What lies ahead is a crap shoot for medical consumers who are left with a ‘damned if I do or damned if I don’t scenario’ (Holy Hormones, 2012)

    Title: Rogue Strain Of MMR Vaccine 'Caused Deafness'
    Date: September 5, 2012
    Source:
    Telegraph

    Abstract: Katie Stephen, who lost the use of her left ear days after being inoculated as a child, is reportedly the first known victim to prove her case to the Vaccine Damage Payments Unit.

    But the 21-year-old has been refused the £120,000 payout for vaccine injury because it is only given to people with 60% disablement.

    The measure used by the Department of Work and Pensions (DWP) to decide payouts defines single-sided deafness as 20% disablement.

    It comes after a second victim, who lost hearing in both ears, received compensation in a previous case, the paper said.

    Miss Stephen's mother Wendy said: "She wasn't born this way. This was done to her by the Department of Health. They distributed pamphlets arguing that this was the right thing to do for your child and not just that but the right thing to do for herd immunity in the UK against these three illnesses."

    Paul Breckell, chief executive of Action on Hearing Loss, said: "We are disappointed that the formula used by the Vaccine Damage Payments Unit does not fully recognise the impact for Katie in completely losing the hearing in her left ear."

    Miss Stephen, from Stonehaven, in Aberdeenshire, was 15 months old when she was given the inoculation in 1991.

    A health visitor recorded hearing problems at 18 months old, although previous tests had been normal, and in 1996 she was diagnosed with deafness.

    According to The Times newspaper, her medical records show that she was deafened by an MMR jab using the rogue Urabe strain of mumps, which was given to 5.4 million British children between 1988 and 1992.

    In total, 10 cases of deafness after the jab were formally recorded at the time, the paper said.

    An academic study found that the cause of deafness in six of those cases was unknown but MMR was a possibility, it added. Four of the suspect cases had single-sided deafness.

    Asked why the industrial injuries measure was being used on vaccine-damaged children, a SWP spokeswoman said: "This is not in regulations - it was considered at the inception of the scheme that disablement should be assessed as a percentage similar to the system as applied in the War Pensions and Industrial Injuries Schemes."

    She added: "The payments were set at the same level as the Industrial Injuries Benefit and does provide financial support to those eligible.

    "Those who are eligible for this help may also be eligible for other support from the benefits system."

    The Department of Health (DoH) stressed the importance of the MMR vaccine and said it had saved many lives.

    Director of Immunisation Professor David Salisbury said: "It is important that parents get their child vaccinated against measles, mumps and rubella - all of which are highly infectious.

    "Uptake rates for the MMR vaccine are at their highest level for 10 years and it is the best way to protect children against all three infections" (Telegraph, 2012).

    Title: Dangerous Banned Vaccine Repackaged And Given New Name
    Date: September 24, 2012
    Source:
    VacTruth

    Abstract: et again the UK government has allowed a previously banned and dangerous vaccine onto the UK market, by repackaging it and giving it a new name in a bid to deceive parents.

    The first time the UK government tried this tactic and succeeded was in 1988 when the JCVI (Joint Committee on Vaccinations and Immunizations) sanctioned the MMR vaccine Pluserix for use in the UK. Pluserix had previously been banned in Canada, causing thousands of children to suffer irreversible side effects as a result. This vaccine went on to cause the same devastation in the UK.

    A Dangerous Vaccine
    Dr. Lucjia Tomljenovic gave a full description of these devastating side effects, including encephalitis, bilateral deafness and meningitis, in her paper The vaccination policy and the Code of Practice of the Joint Committee on Vaccination and Immunisation (JCVI): Are They at Odds? Appalled at the committee’s behavior, she exposed exactly what was being said behind the closed doors of UK’s JCVI. She wrote:

    Thus, instead of re-evaluating the vaccination policy, at least until safety concerns were fully evaluated, the JCVI choose to support the existing policy based on incomplete evidence that was available at that time.” 

    One child who became profoundly deaf in one ear after she received the now banned vaccination, Katie Stephen, is still fighting for compensation to this day. Her mother, Wendy Stephen, is furious at her daughter’s treatment and told The Telegraph in a recent article:

     “She wasn’t born this way. This was done to her by the Department of Health. They distributed pamphlets arguing that this was the right thing to do for your child, and not just that, but the right thing to do for herd immunity in the UK against these three illnesses.” 

    Second Banned Vaccine Gets Revamp
    Obviously not learning from the error of their ways, the UK government has once again potentially put thousands of lives at risk by re-introducing a banned, this time unlicensed vaccine onto the UK market.

    In June 2012, the single mumps vaccine Medi-Mumps cultured on dog kidney cells was advertised for use at a number of private clinics as an alternative option to the MMR. It has since been discovered however, that Medi-Mumps is in fact the banned, unlicensed vaccine Pavivac. To cover this up, just like the MMR vaccine Pluserix, the vaccine was repackaged and given a new name. 

    A Shocking Discovery
    Through intensive research, we have learned that on September 13, 2012, the UK’s MHRA (Medicines and Healthcare Products Regulatory Agency) wrote a press release titled Advertising Investigations. The MHRA wrote:

    13 September 2012

    The MHRA was made aware of information presented on the Children’s Immunisation Centre (CIC) website about Medi-Mumps and a related press release. The MHRA was concerned that the information provided an unbalanced view of the safety and efficacy of the vaccine because it did not mention the MHRA’s concerns and previous CSM advice or that the product was unlicensed. (emphasis added)

    We understood that the Medi-Mumps vaccine is manufactured from the same stock and processed in the same way as Pavivac mumps vaccine. (emphasis added) The MHRA, acting on advice from an independent advisory committee, the Committee on Safety of Medicines (CSM), has for a number of years objected to the importation of the Pavivac product because there is insufficient information available to assure its safety, quality and efficacy. See statement from the committee on safety of medicines (82Kb) for more details.

    Don’t Say We Didn’t War You
    Amazingly in May of this year on this very site, I wrote an article titled New Vaccine Made From Dog Cells May Trigger Allergy to Dogs. My article highlighted the fact that a new single mumps vaccine had been slipped into private clinics in the UK through the back door.

    I highlighted that the Medi-Mumps vaccine had been advertised as being available from June 2012 in two private clinics, The Children’s Immunization Centre, who have now removed the vaccine in question from their listings and The Early Onset Clinic who, at the time of this writing, are still advertising it as available today.

    I queried whether or not that the new vaccine could possibly be the banned vaccine Pavivac repackaged and re introduced as a new product:

    “Interestingly Medi-Mumps is extremely similar to the banned vaccine Pavivac. The Pavivac vaccine was also manufactured in the Czech Republic and cultured on canine kidney cells but this vaccine was rejected by the CSM (Committee on the Safety of Medicines) in 2002 because of safety concerns.” 

    My research was spot on and once again, vactruth.com can be proven to promote child health safety.

    Conclusion
    I would like to know just how these private clinics managed to get this so wrong. Did they not realize that they were and still are, in some cases, advertising and injecting very young children with an unlicensed, previously banned product? Do they also not realize that it has been illegal to advertise unlicensed products to the public since 2010?

    How can we, as healthcare consumers, ever trust our governments if they continue to sanction dangerous, banned and unlicensed products for use on our children? These are only two products that we now know about. How many other banned, unlicensed drugs, vaccines and healthcare products are being recommended for use that are repackaged and renamed? (VacTruth, 2012).

    Title: Meningitis Cases Are Linked To Steroid Injections In Spine
    Date: October 2, 2012
    Source:
    New York Times

    Abstract: Dr. April Pettit, an 
    infectious diseases specialist at Vanderbilt University, was worried about her patient. He had been ill with meningitis for two weeks, he was not getting better, and she could not figure out why. Antibiotics, the usual treatment, were not helping. Bacteria, the usual suspects, could not be found.

    On the morning of Sept. 18, as she and a colleague were examining the patient and talking to his family, a pager buzzed. It was the hospital lab, with an answer at last — but a troubling one.

    A culture of the patient’s spinal fluid had revealed a fungus, Aspergillus. The patient was so ill that he could no longer communicate, so Dr. Pettit spoke to the family.

    “I told them it was a very unusual cause of meningitis in healthy people, and that we needed to try to figure out how he got this infection,” she said.

    Had he done anything unusual in the weeks before he became ill? she asked.

    The answer alarmed her. He had had a steroid injection in his spinal area to relieve back pain — a common treatment, administered to millions of people in the United States every year.

    Dr. Pettit called the State Health Department.

    She is now credited with being the clinician who recognized the “index case” in what has become a frightening outbreak of meningitis that has killed two people and sickened 12 others who also received steroid injections in their spines for pain. Doctors suspect that the steroid medicine was contaminated with the fungus. The meningitis does not spread from person to person.

    Officials said it was not possible to predict the extent of the outbreak yet. Thirteen of the patients have been in Tennessee, and one in North Carolina. Two of the cases were new as of Tuesday, and health officials have said that there could be more cases and that other states could be affected.

    “I don’t think we’ve identified all the cases that will be identified,” said Dr. David Reagan, the chief medical officer for the Tennessee Health Department.

    Dr. Pettit’s patient was one of the two who died.

    The Tennessee patients were treated at the Saint Thomas Outpatient Neurosurgery Center in Nashville, which was closed on Sept. 20. Center staff members notified more than 700 patients who received injections of the suspect drug. Another Tennessee clinic, the Specialty Surgery Center in Crossville, also received shipments of the possibly contaminated drug and was notifying patients.

    Health officials emphasized that the problem appeared to come from the medication and not the clinics themselves, and that the clinics had immediately cooperated by notifying patients and, in the case of Saint Thomas, shutting down when the outbreak was recognized. But the officials have released few details about the source of the drug, saying the investigation was continuing.

    All the patients who became ill were treated with one or more injections between July 30 and Sept. 18, and the incubation period — the time between exposure and when the patient gets sick — has ranged from seven days to about four weeks. That means that some patients may become ill in the next few weeks. Symptoms can include headachedizzinessfever, loss of balance and slurred speech.

    At a news conference on Tuesday, state health officials said some of the patients were recovering, but some were in critical condition.

    The outbreak has led to a nationwide recall of the drug that all the patients received. The drug, preservative-free methylprednisolone acetate, was prepared by one compounding pharmacy, a pharmacy that prepares drug mixtures or solutions for hospitals and clinics. Health officials have declined to name the pharmacy or release lot numbers of the drug, but a spokesman for the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention said that all of the suspect lots had been recalled and that the pharmacy had stopped producing the medication.

    Scientists are also testing other medications used in giving the spinal injections, like numbing agents and antiseptic wipes. They say the cause has not been determined for sure.

    The treatments are called lumbar epidural steroid injections, but they are not the same as the epidurals commonly given to women for childbirth or Caesarean sections — something that health officials wanted to make clear to avoid creating alarm among women who have recently given birth.

    Dr. William Schaffner, the chairman of preventive medicine at Vanderbilt, said that this type of fungal meningitis was serious and difficult to treat, and that the C.D.C. had convened an expert panel to help determine the best treatment. The disease can also be difficult to diagnose, because unlike other types of meningitis, it can cause strokes, and when a patient has stroke symptoms, doctors may not look for an infection as well. In addition, the organism can be difficult to grow in cultures of spinal fluid from patients, making the diagnosis even more of a challenge.

    Detecting and treating the disease as early as possible gives the best chance of curing it, Dr. Schaffner said, so getting the word out to alert both doctors and patients to the symptoms is important.

    He said that he understood the investigators’ reluctance to name the drug maker or provide full details until the investigation is finished, but that the outbreak and its link to the steroid medication have caused quite a bit of worry among both doctors and patients about whether other steroid preparations are safe.

    “We have had many concerns expressed in our own institution,” he said. “Providers say, ‘Can we continue to use the steroids sent to us by our own pharmacy?’ ”

    Others doctors also wanted more information. Dr. Christopher Standaert, a specialist in spinal and neuromusculoskeletal care at the University of Washington in Seattle, and a spokesman for the North American Spine Society, said he hoped that health officials would release the name of the product, the manufacturer and the lot numbers thought to be involved in the outbreak so that clinics could make sure it was not on their shelves.

    “That would help the spine community,” he said. “The rest of us would like to know. It would be nice if they told the hospitals” (New York Times, 2012).

    Title: 13,000 Received Potentially Tainted Steroid Shots, Risk Remains Uncertain
    Date: October 9, 2012
    Source:
    Fox News

    Abstract: As many as 13,000 people received steroid shots suspected in a national meningitis outbreak, health officials said Monday. But it's not clear how many are in danger.

    Officials don't how many of the shots may have been contaminated with meningitis-causing fungus tied to the outbreak. And the figure includes not only those who got them in the back for pain - who are most at risk - but also those who got the shots in other places, like knees and shoulders.

    Those injected in joints are not believed to be at risk for fungal meningitis, said Curtis Allen, a spokesman for the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. He said there was no breakdown available of how many had the shots in the back or in joints.

    The CDC count of cases reached 105 on Monday, including eight deaths. A ninth death was reported late Monday by a Nashville, Tenn., hospital.

    Tennessee has the most cases, followed by Michigan, Virginia, Indiana, Florida, Maryland, Minnesota, North Carolina and Ohio.

    All had received shots for back pain, and investigators suspect a steroid medication made by a specialty pharmacy. About 17,700 single-dose vials of the steroid sent to 23 states have been recalled. Inspectors found at least one sealed vial contaminated with fungus, and tests were being done on other vials.

    The first known case of the rarely seen fungal meningitis was diagnosed last month in Tennessee. The steroid maker, New England Compounding Center of Framingham, Mass., recalled the drug, and over the weekend recalled everything else it makes.

    "While there is no indication at this time of any contamination in other NECC products, this recall is being taken as a precautionary measure," the company said in a statement.

    Meningitis is an inflammation of the lining of the brain and spinal cord, and a back injection would put any contaminant in more direct contact with that lining.

    Symptoms on meningitis include severe headache, nausea, dizziness and fever. The CDC said many of the cases have been mild and some people had strokes. Symptoms have been appearing between one and four weeks after patients got the shots.

    A Michigan man whose wife's death was linked to the outbreak said Monday that he, too, was treated with steroids from one of the recalled batches.

    "Not only have I lost my wife, but I'm watching the clock to see if anything develops," George Cary said, as friends and family gathered for his wife's wake in Howell, 60 miles northwest of Detroit.

    His wife, Lilian, 67, had been ill since late August, but meningitis wasn't detected until Sept. 22, her husband said. She suffered a stroke and died Sept. 30, he said.

    Michigan officials have not released the names of two people who have died in the outbreak in that state, but did say one was a 67-year-old woman.

    Fungal meningitis is not contagious like the more common forms. The two types of fungus linked so far to the outbreak are all around, but very rarely causes illness. Fungal meningitis is treated with high-dose antifungal medications, usually given intravenously in a hospital.

    The steroid is known as preservative-free methylprednisolone acetate, which the compounding pharmacy creates by combining a powder with a liquid.

    Doctors should contact any patient who got doses from any of the recalled lots, and should look back at their records as far back as mid-May, CDC officials say (Fox News, 2012).

    Title: Germany Orders Recall Of Some Novartis Flu Shots
    Date:
    October 25, 2012
    Source:
    Business Week

    Abstract:
    German authorities ordered a recall Thursday of some batches of Novartis flu vaccine as a precautionary measure after the company reported the appearance of small particles in the manufacturing process.

    The Paul Ehrlich Institute, which is part of the country's Ministry of Health, said there had been no reports of particle formation in Germany or of any serious side effects during the current flu season.

    "However, in the interest of risk prevention and consumer safety it is necessary to cancel the approval for certain vaccines, since the formation of particles in the vaccine and therefore the risk of serious side effects cannot be ruled out," Institute President Prof. Klaus Cichutek said in a statement.

    The decision affects four batches of the influenza vaccine Begripal and one batch of Fluad. It does not affect the seasonal vaccine Optaflu.

    Italy's health ministry banned the sale of four Novartis flu drugs on Wednesday. These included Fluad and Begripal — sold as Aggripal in Italy — as well as two others: Influpozzi Adiuvato and Influpozzi Subunita.

    Switzerland's regulator Swissmedic also suspended deliveries of flu vaccines from Novartis as a preventive measure.

    Britain's Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency said there was no evidence yet to pull the vaccines off the market but added it was gathering further information on the Novartis vaccines.

    The Swiss pharmaceutical company said Thursday it was cooperating with the Ministry of Health in Italy, where the vaccines are produced, and was committed to providing vaccines to patients for the current flu season. There had been no adverse effects reported so far from more than 1 million doses of Agrippal/Begripal and Fluad administered, the Basel-based company said.

    "Novartis confirms that these particles can occur in the vaccine manufacturing process and is confident that there is no impact on the safety or efficacy of the vaccine," it said in a statement (Business Week, 2012).

    Title: Canada And Switzerland Lift Novartis Flu Vaccines Ban
    Date:
    October 25, 2012
    Source:
    PM Live

    Abstract:
    Health authorities in Canada and Switzerland have lifted their bans on the sale of Novartis flu vaccines.

    Both countries had previously issued a precautionary halt on the distribution of Agrippal and Fluad after white particles were discovered in certain batches of the product in Italy, but independent testing by each country has deemed the products safe for use.

    Health Canada, the medicines regulator for Canada, said that as a result of its own testing, as well as further information provided by European health authorities and Novartis, both vaccines would now be available for immediate use.

    “None of the information reviewed indicated a safety issue,” said the body in a statement.

    The Public Health Agency of Canada has now advised doctors they can use both Fluad and Agrippal, which is known as Agriflu in Canada, although all products should be shaken and checked for white floating material before being injected.

    It was a similar story in Switzerland, which was one of the first countries to declare a ban on the vaccines.

    The country's drug regulator Swissmedic said that Novartis had provided it with extra information that allowed them to conclude the white particles in the vaccines were not external impurities, but were in fact protein clumps of the vaccine.

    In addition, a separate analysis by Swissmedic itself also confirmed the safety of the vaccines.

    “Those who choose to be vaccinated have no fear of side effects other than those already known,” said the regulator.

    Novartis welcomed both decisions, and said further analysis had reaffirmed the safety of both products, claiming that one million doses had been administered so far during the 2012-2013 flu season, and no unexpected adverse events had been reported.

    “We have remained confident in the safety and efficacy of our vaccines; now we are focused on resuming distributions as soon as possible to protect against seasonal influenza,” said Andrin Oswald, head of Novartis Vaccines and Diagnostics.

    Other countries where ban on either or both Agrippal and Fluad remains in place include Spain, France, Germany, the UK and Italy (PM Live, 2012).

    Title: Vaccine Bombshell: Baby Monkeys Develop Autism Symptoms After Obtaining Doses Of Popular Vaccines
    Date:
    November 3, 2012
    Source:
    Vanguard

    Abstract:
    Following a recent study conducted by scientists at the University of Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania which revealed that many infant monkeys given standard doses of childhood vaccines as part of the new research,developed autism symptoms, question marks over the ultimate safety of vaccines have come to the fore.

    The groundbreaking research findings presented at the International Meeting for Autism Research (IMFAR) in London, England, have revealed that young macaque monkeys given the typical CDC-recommended vaccination schedule from the 1990s, and in appropriate doses for the monkeys’ sizes and ages, tended to develop autism symptoms. Theirunvaccinated counterparts, on the other hand, developed no such symptoms, which points to a strong connection between vaccines and autism spectrum disorders.

    This development which deconstructs mainstream myth that vaccines are safe and pose no risk of autism, was brought on by after studies on the type of proper safety research on typical childhood vaccination schedules that the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) should have conducted — but never has — for such regimens.

    Included in the mix were vaccines containing Thimerosal, a toxic, mercury-based compound that has been phased out of some vaccines, but is still present in batch-size influenza vaccines and a few others.

    Also administered was the controversial measles, mumps, and rubella (MMR) vaccine, which has been linked time and time again to causing autism and various other serious, and often irreversible, health problems in children.

    “This research underscores the critical need for more investigation into immunizations, mercury, and the alterations seen in autistic children,” said Lyn Redwood, Director of SafeMinds, a public safety group working to expose the truth about vaccines and autism.
    “SafeMinds calls for large scale, unbiased studies that look at autism medical conditions and the effects of vaccines given as a regimen.”

    Adding to the sentiment, Theresa Wrangham, president of SafeMinds called out the CDC for failing to require proper safety studies of its recommended vaccination schedules. Unlike all other drugs, which must at least undergo a basic round of safety testing prior to approval and recommendation, vaccinations and vaccine schedules in particular do not have to be proven safe or effective before hitting the market.

    “The full implications of this primate study await publication of the research in a scientific journal,” said Wrangham. “But we can say that it demonstrates how the CDC evaded their responsibility to investigate vaccine safety questions. Vaccine safety oversight should be removed from the CDC and given to an independent agency” (Vanguard, 2012).

    Title: Hundreds Of Children At Risk After Bungling Doctor Gives Incorrect Vaccines
    Date:
    November 9, 2012
    Source:
    Daily Mail

    Abstract:
    A doctor has been reprimanded after hundreds of children were given the wrong vaccines.

    The incorrect vaccines were given to 221 children by the GP in Barnsley, south Yorkshire, as a single jab instead of separate vaccinations.

    Re-vaccinations are now being offered to all the children affected who were given jabs between January 2009 and April this year.

    The jabs were supposed to protect the children against diptheria, whooping cough, polio, tetanus, hib and measles, mumps and rubella.

    National guidelines state these should be given separately to ensure maximum protection. Instead, they were mixed and given as one.

    Mother-of-three Rebecca Hirst, 34, whose five-year-old daughter Poppi was wrongly vaccinated, said she got a letter on Tuesday informing her of the error and offering re-vaccination.

    She said: 'You put your trust in a doctor to do things right. It is disgusting what has happened and in my eyes it shows incompetence.

    'Poppi was given the injection when she started nursery at three years old and she is nearly six. So for three years she has been walking round and has not been immunised.

    'It is a massive failure, if anything else. I’m going to complain to the General Medical Council.'

    Claire Hoyes, 26, also of Barnsley, received a letter for her six-year-old who was vaccinated at the surgery more than two years ago.

    She said: 'It is ridiculous that she has not been protected all this time. I remember taking her for the injection and them being mixed together and never thought anything of it because you trust your doctor.'

    The blunder was brought to the attention of Barnsley NHS public health team in April by a healthcare professional.

    Since then, the trust has reviewed every child’s medical records from the practice, looked at every vaccination they received and traced the children involved.

    Dr Ken McDonald, the medical director at NHS Barnsley, has written to all the parents offering reassurance and re-vaccination after receiving advice from the Health Protection Agency.

    Sharon Stoltz, head of public health for Barnsley said: 'In April we became aware that some children at one GP practice in Barnsley were given some routine childhood vaccinations which were mixed together into a single vaccination when they should have been given separately.

    'Action was taken immediately once this was identified to ensure no further vaccinations were given in this way. The GP practice is now giving immunisations in lione with national guidance.

    'We have worked quickly to investigate the issue and to identify those parents that needed to be informed.'

    The doctor involved has been required to undertake extra training and participate in a mentoring programme. Staff at the surgery declined to comment (Daily Mail, 2012).