Greg Glaser
Bible studies (non-denominational) with a focus on mathematics and logic, by Greg Glaser
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hWD0r1mj-uQ California Real Estate Attorney on Selling Homes For Sale By Owner
search mp3 soundcloud for greg glaser https://soundcloud.com/search?q=greg%20glaser
2021 01 12 Liberty Line Up Kristen Chevrier With Greg Glaser Save The Control Group And Protect Against Mandatory Vax
https://www.naturalnewsradio.com/2021-01-10-greg-glaser-the-control-group-litigation-informed-consent.html Greg Glaser, The Control Group Litigation, Informed consent
Greg Glaser, J.D.
Greg Glaser, J.D. is a vaccine rights attorney with a litigation and transactional law background. He is a graduate of UCLA and the University of San Francisco. As a lawyer, he is committed to protecting the fundamental right of informed consent, and is devoted to helping doctors write medical exemptions to vaccination, in compliance with SB277.
Working with the Pandemic Response Project (PReP), Greg is the co-author of the Peaceful and Natural Dignity Act (PANDA), a proposed law to protect against forced medication during pandemics, and to promote a home-based quarantine solution under State law.
He lives in Copperopolis, California with his wife and daughter, and enjoys organic ranching, reading, writing, hiking, playing sports, and philosophy.
“Like most Americans, I just assumed vaccines were harmless. After my daughter’s first round of injections, the experience forced me to open my eyes and actually research the matter. I found a suspicious list of vaccine ingredients, and an absolute certainty of widespread, under-reported vaccine injury across our population. Seeing my nephew suffer after the MMR vaccine also prompted me to research holistic ways to detox from vaccine injury.” – Greg Glaser, J.D.
https://soundcloud.com/ktalkmedia/kristen-chevrier-with-greg-glaser 2021-01-12 Kristen Chevrier With Greg Glaser Save The Control Group
https://www.naturalnewsradio.com/2021-01-10-greg-glaser-the-control-group-litigation-informed-consent.html Greg Glaser, The Control Group Litigation, Informed consent
https://vaxxter.com/who-does-political-polarization-harm/ Who Does “Political Polarization” Really Harm?
TOPICS:#WalkAway5G RolloutMandatory Vaccines
POSTED BY: GREG GLASER 10/27/2020
By Greg Glaser, JD, Vaxxter Contributor
As a lawyer who vigilantly tracks vaccine legislation across the country, I can confirm that Democrats push vaccine mandates as their official policy, while Republicans stand with independents and respect health freedom as their official policy. For example, look at the votes on mandatory childhood vaccines in California (SB277) where 92% of Democrats voted for vaccine mandates while 86% of Republicans opposed vaccine mandates:
This same voting pattern has been repeated in every State, every single time, without exception. See examples here and here. Political affiliation is literally the single deciding factor today for whether Americans will be forcibly vaccinated.
BigPharma calls this voting pattern “political polarization” and they hate it because it means that as a voting block, conservatives are increasingly aware of vaccine dangers. Indeed, when you google ‘political polarization and vaccines’ you can see plainly that BigPharma and the MSM can see that vaccine mandates are becoming “politically polarized.” For example, Neal Goldstein of Drexel University’s public health school suggests the issue of vaccine mandates “has indeed entered a hyper-partisan landscape. As a result, it may be wise to avoid legislation when possible to avoid opening more wounds.”
Also see: “Vaccinations are the new political wedge issue”. Link. And regarding political polarization generally, see here and here.
Translation: Big Pharma is afraid to push mandates into a “politically polarized” environment where conservatives actually have a voice.
Big Business and Mandates
This shouldn’t be surprising, because it follows historical trends. For example, Big Chemical has always been afraid of political progressives aligning as a voting block by the millions with the environmental movement. Same with Big Abortion and the industry that harvests aborted babies – both fear conservatives as 50%+ of the voting public.
BigPharma, BigChemical, BigAbortion: they all hate political polarization because it disrupts their special interest legislation. Vaccine mandates are indeed special interest legislation.
BigPharma & the MSM literally seem to be begging the public not to become “politically polarized” around vaccines. BigPharma is aware it can’t push mandates in a “politically polarized” environment.
Why do some folks in our health freedom movement agree with BigPharma’s format by calling for “political unity”? None can ignore the plain reality that vaccine mandates are “politically polarized”, with Democrats voting for mandates but Republicans & Independents voting for freedom.
Fortunately, President Trump stands for informed consent and vaccine awareness.
Comparing Trump (freedom) to Biden (mandates)
Serial vaccine mandator Hillary Clinton (D) has endorsed fellow serial vaccine mandator Joe Biden (D) for President. See also Biden’s quote this month, ”
“We should be thinking about making it [the COVID vaccine] mandatory.” Biden added that he’d ask governors, mayors, and council members to encourage and mandate vaccines.”
Biden also says he would make wearing face masks mandatory.
Biden supports mandatory contact tracing (human tracking via BigTech). See here and here.
Health Freedom: Biden vs. Trump
Compare President Trump who supports health freedom enthusiastically — he has repeatedly stated on camera that vaccination will continue to be voluntary (example), vaccination should be voluntary and questioned (example), masks will also be voluntary and questioned (example), and human tracking is unnecessary and unconstitutional (example).
And here are more important things to know about Trump:
Trump’s Federal Preemption Means Trump Is Actively Preventing State/Local Cov19 Vaccine Mandates. Many people think Trump is pushing a mandatory Covid-19 vaccine. He is not. The reality is that by asserting Federal control over the Covid-19 vaccine, Trump has legally preempted/stopped State governors from having jurisdiction to mandate the vaccine. Trump even went so far as to say the US Military will be involved; which is the ultimate expression of Federal preemption. Thus, Trump is protecting Americans from forced vaccination by preventing liberal States like California and New York from mandating it.
Trump Broadcasted To Everyone the Vaccine Is Experimental. Pharma-shills like Fauci begged Trump not to call the Covid-19 vaccine “warp speed”, but Trump called it “warp speed” anyway to advise the people that it is experimental. Think about this logically. Would foreign leaders like Angela Merkel call their vaccine development ‘Operation Warp Speed’? Trump has been in office for approximately 4-years and has never mandated vaccines. For example, he didn’t mandate the flu shot during the “flu epidemic” of 2017. Trump didn’t even mandate face masks during Covid-19. Why would anyone think he would mandate a Covid-19 vaccine? Trump’s words,
“This is going to go away without a vaccine.” See here
“I don’t believe I’d ever do a mandated vaccine, because I just don’t think I would do that, where you have to have it,’ Trump told Stuart Varney on Fox Business Network’s ‘Varney & Co.’ “Because there are some people who feel strongly about the whole situation.”). See also here, and here
“if you don’t get it [the vaccine], this is going to go away at some point”… “It’s not solely vaccine based. Other things have never had a vaccine and they go away. So I don’t want people to think this is all dependent on a vaccine.” Link.
Trump Upholds Religious Freedom. Trump has shown a commitment to health freedom by supporting religious freedoms against mandatory vaccinations. Example.
Trump Defunds WHO Vaccine Mandators. Trump has withdrawn financial support for the WHO, which is a serial vaccine mandator, and he will be reviewing (investigating) them. Link.
This is part of Trump’s strategy: he gains jurisdiction over major figureheads like Gates and Fauci and WHO bosses by associating with them (or giving them funds), then he destroys their credibility in public, investigates them to gain their records, and then he changes policy (he’s doing the same thing now with Comey and FISA-gate). By contrast, if Trump just waltzed into office and started dismantling the CDC and FDA, or randomly claiming jurisdiction over Bill Gates, then Trump wouldn’t last 2 days as President. There is a proper procedure to jurisdiction, investigations and justice.
Trump Attacks BigPharma’s Bottom Line. Trump is working to turn Big Pharma into little Pharma by supporting measures to drastically reduce prescription drug prices. See here and here. Big Pharma hates Trump so much they even boycott his events. Link. Take a look at Pharma operating budgets – they rely on huge income streams to sustain operations. When those income streams tighten up, the companies are calculated to withdraw funding from advertising and lobbying. It’s a power play for the people.
Understanding Trump’s Methods
Trump says what he says about vaccines so he will be perceived as a moderate. Historically and strategically, it is the moderates who create change, even fundamental change.
Trump has never forced vaccination on anyone, so that’s good.
The most he’s done is continue U.S. federal government control and involvement over vaccine development and distribution. And that’s just how the world works — if he didn’t control it, he couldn’t change it.
Same with 5G. Trump has never forced 5G on anyone. Rather he’s set the stage for the U.S. federal government to study 5G for years to come, and to control it and change the technology. Most people correctly equate “5G” with a specific (and harmful) method of transmitting data that’s dangerous. But the reality is that wireless data transmission doesn’t need to be dangerous; we just need to change the technology, to create harmonious technology, for example, a wave propagation in harmony with Earth’s natural rhythms allowing us to reach exponential transmission. I expect that is the kind of progress Trump means when he says, “We will have 5G, 6G, and beyond!”
This is an important point that I think some folks miss: the new 5G legislation empowers Trump to require changes to 5G technology. It put all the power into the hands of Trump (who stopped 5G rollouts) rather than into the hands of industry (who was pushing for 5G rollouts). In short, we now need Trump’s approval in order to get something done.
Like with many things in life, knowing who controls something powerful can be more important than the laws governing that powerful thing.
If the U.S. didn’t control 5G, it would be controlled by China that treats its citizens like cattle. Then to solve the problem the good guys would need to infiltrate China, and war.
If the U.S. didn’t control GMOs, they would be controlled by some other nation through patents. Then to solve the problem the good guys would need to infiltrate those other nations, and war.
Technologies such as 5G, GMO, and Artificial Intelligence, are basically inevitable. The only question is who is going to control technologies and set checks and balances for technologies. Is there any other Nation with a better record of checks and balances than the USA, especially before the love of money corrupted so many into becoming corporatists and statists? I can’t fault Trump for positioning the US to control technology. Is there any other nation on earth with the consumer advocacy resources and ingrained freedom ideology to literally steward the world into a humane technological future, and also a Nation with the military might to actually enforce its decisions for those checks and balances?
Trump Prevented 5G Rollouts. Using National Security as the reason, Trump took the reins over dangerous 5G technology, preventing nationwide rollouts and instead, is currently pursuing research and safety improvements. For four years Trump has blocked 5G in the name of ‘research’, thereby protecting us from liberal cities and states that were trying to force 5G on the public. See here, here, and here. Trump even allocated the funds that Congress authorized for 5G and spent it on things like roads and bridges. Even if folks don’t yet see or believe how Trump protected us, I expect that in the future we’ll be able to look back on this “Secure 5G and Beyond” legislation as a pivotal turning point that protected people from the runaway train of 5G rollouts. And yes, this legislation gave Trump all the power was accomplished because Trump is perceived as a moderate, not in spite of it. Expect the same on the vaccine issue.
Trump Supports Environmental Engineering For Root Environmental Reform. Rather than greenwashing like previous administrations (i.e., manufacturing solar panels with toxins to “save” the planet; banning plastic straws to “clean” the ocean), Trump has instead relied on the Nation’s engineers to innovate new technologies that actually can clean the planet.
Democrats tend to think politicians & bureaucrats will clean the earth with their regulations (even though these regulators have presided over and approved the worst pollution in human history, and now claim the greatest threat to humanity is not pollution in its thousands of forms but rather carbon), whereas Republicans are more likely to recognize the reality that engineers produce root solutions transcending political issues and not requiring bureaucracy to sustain. Incidentally, Trump says he is an environmentalist, and his record shows nature conservation. See here and here. So I’m optimistic for the bright future of environmental engineering in the USA.
A Message to Every Democrat in the Health Freedom Community
Given the statistical fact that the Democratic Party is the #1 opponent of health freedom who is literally trying to forcefully vaccinate and track us electronically, why not announce that simple truth openly, and announce that you’re really an Independent? Why not #WalkAway?
Relatedly, I also don’t understand the whole ‘unity at all costs’ thing? Don’t get me wrong, I’m a Californian so I love kumbayah sentiments, but does ‘unity at all costs’ even work in reality to create change? When you study this phrase “political polarization”, you can find countless examples where ‘unity at all costs’ is a failed strategy because it does not create change. For example, if you want to stop liberals from killing babies (abortion), it is a proven effective strategy to withdraw support from the political wing that supports killing babies. Trying to convince liberals to stop baby killing is like trying to convince Merck to stop manufacturing the MMR; not gonna happen. Merck is all in with the MMR. Planned Parenthood is all in with abortions. The Democratic Party is all in with vaccines.
This should make sense to liberals. They can no more convince conservatives to support repealing the 2nd Amendment than they could convince Christians to accept forced microchipping. Sure, you might get a few confused takers here and there, but is it wise or even hopeful to plant good seeds in the desert?
That is why the health freedom movement should focus its efforts and sowing seeds within the fertile field of conservativism, where patriots are actively open to waking up by the untold millions, and waking up immediately.
Independents all across America are flocking to health freedom primarily because they are realizing that mandatory vaccination and electronic tracking have become the official policies of BigPharma and BigTech and the Democratic Party.
One last point: Compare conservative news to liberal news and observe how they report entirely differently. For example, when a UN Official claimed that governments because of coronavirus “may have to enter homes and remove family members”, Tucker Carlson, a conservative broadcast host with FoxNews, correctly exposed the UN as tyrannical and out of touch with American families. Link.
By contrast, Rachel Maddow, the liberal broadcast host with MSNBC, praised the UN for their forward-thinking approaches and cited a NY Times health reporter on the ‘virtues’ of government forcefully separating family members in their own homes for their own good. Link.
No more excuses. #WalkAway and unite with the health freedom community.
New survey of vaccine-free group exposes long-term impact of vaccination policies on public health by Greg Glaser and Pat O’Connell
POSTED BY: VAXXTERADMIN3 02/22/2021
They tell us vaccines are “safe and effective.”
They tell us the risks of common diseases outweigh the risks of vaccines.
They tell us vaccine risks are “rare.”
What if none of these claims are true?
In 2019, Joy Garner with The Control Group set out to answer that question by conducting a litigation survey of never-vaccinated people. They found that, in every case, the claims we hear from our vaunted government and TV experts about the risks and benefits of vaccines are demonstrably false.
In fact, they learned that the tiny, vaccine-free minority of Americans is far healthier overall than the vaccinated majority.
But let’s step back for a moment to the questions we should all be asking about those familiar claims.
(Q) ARE VACCINES SAFE?
(A) NO.
In its 2011 case, Bruesewitz v. Wyeth, the US Supreme Court acknowledged that vaccines cause injuries.
“The National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986 (NCVIA or Act) created a no-fault compensation program to stabilize a vaccine market adversely affected by an increase in vaccine-related tort litigation and to facilitate compensation to claimants who found pursuing legitimate vaccine-inflicted injuries too costly and difficult.”
The Court noted that vaccine injuries are unavoidable.
“Most importantly, the Act eliminates manufacturer liability for a vaccine’s unavoidable, adverse side effects.”
Justice Scalia noted that the FDA regulations specify no criteria for measuring, much less ensuring, the claimed safety or effectiveness of vaccines.
“Indeed, the FDA has never even spelled out in regulations the criteria it uses to decide whether a vaccine is safe and effective for its intended use.” (Emphasis added.)
To make our answer even clearer, the law classifies vaccines as “unavoidably unsafe products.”
“Unavoidably unsafe products. There are some products which, in the present state of human knowledge, are quite incapable of being made safe for their intended and ordinary use. These are especially common in the field of drugs.”
The excerpt above aptly notes the common and more direct synonym for the word unsafe. That synonym is: dangerous.
Unavoidably dangerous products include motorcycles, parachutes, chainsaws guns …
… and vaccines.
To emphasize the point, the 1986 law gave vaccine makers immunity from legal liability and created a no-fault vaccine court that compensates families for documented vaccine injuries and deaths out of a taxpayer fund.
So the answer to the question “Are vaccines safe?” is a solid and resounding “No.”
We know for a fact vaccines are dangerous. They absolutely cause injuries and deaths. And yet “the authorities” have decided for us that the benefits outweigh the risks. What is that decision based on?
(Q) DO THE RISKS OF COMMON DISEASES OUTWEIGH THE RISKS OF VACCINES?
(A) WE DON’T KNOW.
That’s right: We. Don’t. Know.
WHY we don’t know is a long story. But the key reasons are these:
The real risks of common, short-term, vaccine-targeted diseases are routinely exaggerated, and the truth about those risks is suppressed by the authorities and the media. One recent report on changes to the vaccine court’s injury table from the US Department of Health and Humans Services (HHS) repeats empty claims of vaccine benefit and discounts the scope and severity of vaccine harms without a shred of proof.
The benefits of common diseases are rarely, if ever, acknowledged by the authorities. (Yes there are benefits of getting diseases, including reduction in the risks of more serious illnesses like shingles and certain cancers.)
Emergency vaccines (like those for covid-19) may not be properly tested in animals before being approved for Phase 1 human trials. Animal trials are crucial to determine how vaccinated subjects react later, when they are exposed to the wild virus, to ensure they don’t create pathogenic priming, which can trigger a dangerous, sometimes deadly, immune overreaction called a “cytokine storm.”
Vaccines are not safety tested against harmless (inert) placebos like saline. They’re tested against false “placebos” consisting of other unavoidably unsafe vaccines already on the market or the most toxic ingredients in the new vaccine. That’s why we never know how vaccines stack up against Nature, or random chance. Similarly, vaccine clinical trials never use fully unvaccinated control subjects. This is like a tobacco company claiming cigarettes are safe because they compared people who smoke 70 cigarettes per week to those who smoke 69 cigarettes per week.
The authorities have never systematically and broadly compared the long-term health of the vaccine-free who have caught these infections versus the health of those who have been vaccinated for the diseases.
Despite what we’re told, we simply can’t know whether getting common infections is more dangerous than getting vaccinations for them without studying the health outcomes of both vaccinated and unvaccinated subjects.
(Q) ARE THE RISKS OF VACCINES “RARE”?
(A) WE DON’T KNOW.
Again, there’s something vitally important we don’t know about a widely and coercively used class of product.
And again, it’s a long story.
There are many reasons we don’t know how “rare” (or common) vaccine injuries and deaths are. They include these:
The national Vaccine Adverse Events Reporting System (VAERS) captures fewer than 1% of all vaccine reactions and deaths according to the government’s own study by Harvard Pilgrim Health Care. In other words, the system misses more than 99% of harms caused by vaccines. That means any statistics showing the number of adverse reactions must be multiplied by 100 for a reasonably accurate estimate.
(To be clear: injuries and deaths occurring after vaccines are not necessarily caused by the vaccines. Correlation does not equal causation. But when associations stretch the bounds of coincidence to the breaking point, we are obligated to look deeper for possible connections.)And there is no system that tracks long-term vaccine consequences that only emerge after months or years of immune overstimulation by vaccine toxins that can’t be easily purged from the body.
In three separate reviews of the best available science on claimed vaccine harms, the government’s Institute of Medicine (IOM) found the majority (as high as 85%) of studies were “inadequate” to either prove or disprove causation. This means the studies were so poorly designed and/or executed they can’t prove anything, one way or the other.
The entire vaccine schedule and the specific combinations of vaccines that children are routinely given at one time have never been studied for interactive or cumulative harms.
The authorities have never systematically and broadly compared the overall health of the vaccinated to that of vaccine-free populations.
Our healthcare providers are taught, perhaps pressured, to see even distressing vaccine reactions as “normal,” and to categorize diseases and disorders that arise weeks, months or years after vaccination as “unrelated coincidences.” They may indeed see and worry about the declining health among patients, but never connect those declines with vaccines because the evidence that might connect them is lacking, inadequate or suppressed.
“Rare” can only be judged in relation to something else. In the case of vaccine harms, we need a substantial group of vaccine-free citizens and a clear accounting of their health issues to compare the relative “rarity” (or frequency) of harms in people who get vaccines to the frequency of such harms in people who don’t.
This reference population exists for moment, though their numbers are falling. And our esteemed authorities steadfastly refuse to study them.
That’s why the answer to question three, “Are vaccine risks rare?” is also “We don’t know.”
THE LOOMING EXTINCTION OF OUR ENDANGERED VACCINE-FREE POPULATION
Joy Garner realized that the most important group of people in America was being driven toward extinction by ever more forceful vaccine mandates, dwindling exemptions, and blatant coercion.
Her survey group represents the desperately needed “control group” for this massive experiment our authorities have been conducting on our children, and increasingly on adults, for at least 30 years now. Only the never-vaccinated among us can show us what life and health look like when we let our immune systems do their jobs and manage illnesses as they come along.
The vast majority of Americans—99.97%, or more than 329 million—have been exposed to vaccines.
By contrast, our tiny group of vaccine-free citizens makes up only about 0.26% of the population, or roughly 800,000 children and adults.
Yet, curiously, they are often feared and blamed for all the ills of the majority. Do the healthy, unvaccinated few among us really have that much power?
Garner saw the decline of the unvaccinated control population and knew it was vitally important to gather the wisdom manifested in their health trajectories while it was still possible. And it was important to protect this endangered species from extinction.
THE CONTROL GROUP SURVEY
Garner named her litigation The Control Group for obvious reasons. Her passion and love for others drove her to tackle this project our authorities should have done, and still should do on a larger scale.
But it was her intelligence and business experience that gave her the skills and confidence to pull it off.
After all, at its core, the task was straightforward:
Create a survey like the ones the authorities typically use to gather health data on Americans.
Get the survey into the hands of the target population (the never-vaccinated).
Crunch the numbers from the surveys, and validate the results.
Compare health outcomes from the survey results to national health statistics for the vaccinated majority.
The survey instruments themselves were streamlined into two forms, and the process followed appropriate protocols for collecting and reporting health data for litigation. The forms prompted respondents to report all illnesses and disabilities.
Garner reached the subject population by promoting the survey through social media, radio interviews, events, referrals and other means.
Surveys were manually completed and mailed back (or handed back at events) to help eliminate some of the flaws in online, electronic surveys.
Follow-up calls clarified unclear answers and helped ensure participants recalled and reported all health issues.
Garner compiled and evaluated the results using established statistical practices, and engaged experts in relevant fields to validate the forms and the process as well as the results.
And she acquired comparable statistics for the vaccination population from national health reports.
In the end, survey respondents represented a solid 0.179% of the entire vaccine-free population, estimated during the survey period at around 832,521 Americans, and ranged in age from under 1 year to 73.
From the data on both groups—the vaccinated and the never-vaccinated—her team generated graphs that tell a powerful story, one every American, indeed, every citizen of the world, should hear. Now. While they still can.
THE RESULTS: VACCINATED VS. UNVACCINATED
In every case, the vaccinated majority of Americans (shown in orange) experienced far more illness and dysfunction than the vaccine-free survey population. How much more? See for yourself.
ABOUT THE GRAPHS. The orange graphs on the following pages represent the vaccinated majority whose health data was reported in national health statistics. The yellow graphs represent survey subjects who never received vaccinations directly, but have been exposed to vaccines in the womb, or to some of the same toxic ingredients in the so-called vitamin K shot at birth. The blue-depicted segment of the vaccine-free group have never received any vaccines or vaccine-related toxic exposures.
The Big Picture: chronic illness
The first graph shows that at least 27%* of America’s vaccinated children have chronic health conditions in general. That’s 10 to 20 million kids and families dealing every day with issues ranging from allergies, asthma and rashes … to ADHD or autism … to epilepsy, cerebral palsy, cystic fibrosis, diabetes, or even cancer.
“Ten to twenty million children and adolescents in the United States have some form of chronic illness or disability.” – HealthyChildren.org
* Because the definition of “chronic illness” has changed over the years, this chart uses the same 2010 national health data used to calculate a Pearson Correlation Coefficient showing a very high correlation between the CDC vaccine schedule and childhood chronic disease. As of 2020, the national rate of chronic illness is closer to 54% or higher.
Vaccinated kids are 3.5 times more likely to have one chronic illness and 5.7 times more likely to have multiple chronic conditions.
That means more family disruption, more medication and doctor visits, more expenses, and more risk from complications of infectious diseases like covid-19.
For our adult population, with their cumulative exposures to vaccinations, the picture is even more dramatic…and disturbing.
National statistics show that vaccinated adults are 9.5 times more likely to have chronic conditions, including asthma and arthritis, plus some of the leading causes of death such as diabetes, heart disease, respiratory illness, and cancer.
Vaccinated adults are 43 times more likely to have two chronic conditions.
And 12% of the vaccinated have five chronic illnesses. These are the people we’ve heard about on the news who are at increased risk of hospitalization and death from infectious diseases like covid-19. Yet NONE among the vaccine-free population fall into that highest-risk category.
Let’s take a closer look at how these general health issues manifest in specific illnesses.
Children’s health outcomes
Vaccinated children are many times more likely to suffer from asthma, eczema, food allergies, ear fluid, and strabismus (eye alignment issues).
Vaccinated populations also have far more developmental and neurological issues, learning disabilities, speech disorders, epilepsy, ADHD, and autism.
For example, the rate of ADHD is 19 times more common in vaccinated kids.
Significantly, NO vaccine-free babies had died from sudden infant death syndrome (SIDS).
And NO vaccine-free children had cancer.
Adult and general health outcomes
Vaccinated people had 44 times more digestive disorders, and a whopping 207.5 times more chronic sinusitis (sinus infections).
Illnesses they DIDN’T SEE in the vaccine-free population
Perhaps most astounding is the range of illnesses the vaccine-free subjects just didn’t have. The contrast between the vaccinated and the unvaccinated are illustrated in the graphics below. The vaccine-free had ZERO adult ADHD and asthma, ZERO arthritis, ZERO diabetes, ZERO heart disease, and even ZERO cancer.
Children’s health problems “very highly correlated” with CDC vaccine schedule
To bring this message home, The Control Group’s statistical analysis of national health data shows a “very high correlation” between the increases in children’s health problems and the increases in vaccination since 1994.
These are not coincidences.
Regardless of whether this survey fully reflects the overall vaccine-free population, the data collected here are more than compelling enough to warrant further inquiry.
CORROBORATING STUDIES
Any study can and should be challenged. That’s what real science is all about. The Control Group pilot survey is no exception.
However, it’s important to note that two other studies (Hooker/Miller, and Thomas/Weiler-Lyons) were also released in 2020 comparing health outcomes of vaccinated and unvaccinated subjects.
And in all three studies, the same pattern emerged: the vaccinated experienced far more overall illness and dysfunction than the vaccine-free.
So, while we may be inclined to take one, perhaps even two, studies with a grain of salt, when three independent studies—approaching the same question from three different perspectives, using different subjects—all tell the same story, it’s worth taking a closer look and conducting well-funded, comprehensive studies.
In fact, The Control Group’s Joy Garner has already designed and proposed such a study for the government to sponsor or conduct.
CAVEATS, LESSONS LEARNED
Many questions remain. The resources listed at the end of this article provide more detailed information.
We don’t know how many Americans are vaccine free
Because federal agencies—like the Census Bureau in its National Survey of Childhood Health, which routinely surveys Americans’ health status—don’t bother to collect data on vaccination status, we cannot know the exact percentage of the population that’s never been exposed to vaccines. Most researchers estimate that number at well below 1%, more likely at 0.26%.
National statistics include the never-vaccinated
We can reasonably assume that any national health data includes that tiny number of never-vaccinated Americans. However, the results of these 2020 studies all suggest that, if the unvaccinated skew the national health statistics at all, they cause the true scale of our devastating national health crisis to be underestimated.
The Control Group had higher percentage of children than the overall population
In all fairness, this pilot survey surveyed toward the youthful side with nearly 86% of respondents under 18 and only 14% adults, whereas the national population has about 23% in the 0-18 group and 77% adults. Therefore, the data regarding illnesses that typically appear or increase in prevalence with age may be underrepresented in any of the combined (children and adults) results reported here.
However, this disproportion between unvaccinated children and adults in the pilot study only highlights the difficulty we face of sustaining a fully-representative, natural control group through which to judge the overall effectiveness of public health measures like mass vaccination.
Simply put: the older we get, the harder it is to remain vaccine-free. Jobs increasingly require vaccinations. Today we see pressures to vaccinate for travel and for admission to events and facilities. We may even be vaccinated during medical procedures without realizing it. And seniors in assisted living or nursing facilities are frequently urged to vaccinate and may face discrimination or loss of benefits if they refuse.
Our natural control group of vaccine-free citizens is an endangered species and must be protected from extinction.
THE LEGAL CASE: PROTECTING THE VACCINE-FREE, FREEING EVERYONE
Given that vaccines are demonstrably dangerous yet their true risks have never been properly measured and quantified by the authorities using an unvaccinated control group, this practice of near-universal vaccination by public policy constitutes a massive medical experiment perpetrated on the American population without their fully informed consent. It must be halted until we have better data available.
In 2021 Informed Consent Legal Defense and The Control Group leaders and participants are bringing to federal court mountains of evidence for vaccine harms, with reasons to protect the unvaccinated and the right of everyone to freely give or refuse to give informed consent for vaccinations. Their first court appearance will be on Feb 22, 2021.
They are asking the Federal Judge for a Preliminary Injunction that will conditionally stop current mass vaccination policies and pressures until such time as the overall risks of vaccines are properly measured and reported by the government using a large group of never-vaccinated Americans as controls for comparison.
This legal action, if successful, will achieve one or more desired outcomes, including:
Ensure that a wealth of critical facts about known vaccine risks are on the official record.
Document the scope of dangerous unknowns about vaccine risks and recognize the nature of current mass vaccination policy as “experimental.”
Ensure the results of The Control Group’s pilot survey and their proposal for a large-scale, auditable survey are on the official record.
Protect the endangered vaccine-free population and those who wish to make their own choices regarding vaccination, by authorizing the following actions:
Remove from citizens the burden to prove vaccines caused their injuries and shift that burden of proof to the government to calculate and prove the benefits of vaccinations outweigh their lifetime risks. And until such time as the government publishes quantified proof of safety and “rarity” of risk, this action will also:
Prohibit the practice of referring to vaccines as “safe” in marketing and promotion.
Protect free citizens’ rights to give or withhold informed consent for medical experimentation, including for vaccination.
Make all vaccinations voluntary, and authorize a proposed universal vaccine exemption called the National Informed Consent Exemption (NICE).
Make any laws, regulations or policies unenforceable if they discriminate against or segregate free citizens based solely on their refusal to consent to medical experimentation in the form of vaccination.
Prosecute any acts of discrimination or segregation that are based solely on vaccination status.
Free parents from any charges of medical neglect, or denial of medical care for their children based solely on vaccination choices and status.
Regardless of our individual beliefs, we should all want to know whether vaccines make us healthier or sicker as a human community. And if they are, indeed, harming us and our children for a lifetime in exchange for suppressing typically mild, short-term illness symptoms, we need to completely overhaul our public health policies.
We also need to review our personal choices, as well as The Control Group’s graphic revelations of health experiences in the lives of those who do and don’t use vaccines, then ask ourselves: Which life do I want to live? Which life do I want for my family?
—————————-
FOR MORE INFORMATION, CHECK OUT THE LINKS BELOW.
(1) The Control Group survey: “Statistical Evaluation of Health Outcomes in the Unvaccinated.” This page provides links to the survey’s documents, including the full report and the actual forms used to collect the data, and the full-page graphs depicting their comparisons of health outcomes for vaccinated and surveyed unvaccinated populations.
https://www.thecontrolgroup.org/
(2) The 1986 National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act (NCVIA) protects vaccine makers from legal liability for vaccine injuries and deaths, with the intention to make it easier for victims’ families to receive compensation for many known and unknown harms caused by vaccines. That goal has not been met.
https://www.congress.gov/bill/99th-congress/house-bill/5546
(3) The Vaccine Injury Compensation Program (VICP) executes the NCVIA, managed mostly within the HRSA under the HHS, but uses Department of Justice (DoJ) lawyers to oppose victims’ families in vaccine court.
(4) The Bruesewitz ruling effectively stopped all lawsuits against vaccine makers for design defects. In Bruesewitz v. Wyeth (2011), the Supreme Court affirmed and reinforced the fact that the 1986 law acknowledged the unavoidable dangerousness baked into the design of vaccines and freed vaccine makers from legal liability for injuries and deaths caused by product design defects. Plaintiffs can still sue for manufacturing flaws, contamination, or even for the drug company’s failure to provide warnings and disclose all known or suspected side effects. But not if the product works as designed and still causes harm.
https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/10pdf/09-152.pdf
(5) “Unavoidably unsafe products” are discussed in the Code of Federal Regulations, Restatement of Torts (Second) 402A (k) § 402A. Special Liability of Seller of Product for Physical Harm to User or Consumer, Comment k. These are just a few references:
“Unavoidably Unsafe Products: Clarifying the Meaning and Policy Behind Comment K”
https://scholarlycommons.law.wlu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2953&context=wlulr
“Unavoidably Unsafe Products: A Modest Proposal”
https://scholarship.kentlaw.iit.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=4037&context=cklawreview
“Understanding dangerous design defects and proving them”
(6) Just one example of baseless claims of vaccine safety and effectiveness: A 2021 HHS report on changes to the vaccine injury table falsely claims: “Vaccination is one of the best ways to protect against potentially harmful diseases that can be very serious, may require hospitalization, or even be deadly. Almost all individuals who are vaccinated have no serious reactions.” We’ve already shown that we have insufficient data to show the real vaccine risks and the “rarity” of them.
Vaccination is NOT the best way to protect: “It is true that natural infection almost always causes better immunity than vaccines.” https://www.chop.edu/centers-programs/vaccine-education-center/vaccine-safety/immune-system-and-health And the risks from most common diseases are wildly exaggerated.
(7) Informed Consent Defense. This page contains links to all the legal documents associated with the “Request for Judicial Notice” and “Motions for Preliminary Injunction” filed on behalf of Joy Garner and others. There is a treasure trove of information here. Highlights and recommended reading are listed after the main link below.
https://informedconsentdefense.org/
C5 – Proposed orders. If you want to understand the objective of the case, this reference skips to the end, offering three alternative rulings for the Court to choose from. The first asks for comprehensive relief; the other two are desired runners-up.
A – The Verified Petition comprises the main arguments and requests being made of the Court.
A3 – Appendix Two contains a wealth of sources supporting the assertion that vaccines are, indeed, dangerous.
C3 – The expert declarations. This is where to find the survey’s raw data and a variety of relevant scientific information.
Charts and infographics – Click the various images on the main page to see full-page visuals and summaries of key data depicting The Control Group’s survey findings as well as national statistics.
Short overview video by attorney Greg Glaser: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ytryf-EziFU
(8) Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS)
https://vaers.hhs.gov/about.html
(9) Harvard Pilgrim Healthcare study of VAERS conducted for the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ) under the HHS concluded that “[F]ewer than 1% of vaccine adverse events are reported. Low reporting rates preclude or slow the identification of “problem” drugs and vaccines that endanger public health. New surveillance methods for drug and vaccine adverse effects are needed.”
(10) “Vaccine Safety” a white paper summarizing the IOM’s reports and the vaccine safety question in general by the Informed Consent Action Network. Good overview.
https://www.icandecide.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/09/VaccineSafety-Version-1.0-October-2-2017-1.pdf
(11) Institute of Medicine’s Vaccine Safety Reports main page
https://www.vaccinesafety.edu/IOM-Reports.htm
(12) Institute of Medicine’s 2011/2012 report “Adverse Effects of Vaccines; Evidence and Causality”
https://www.nap.edu/catalog/13164/adverse-effects-of-vaccines-evidence-and-causality
(13) Other 2020 studies of vaccinated vs. unvaccinated children:
Hooker/Miller: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/2050312120925344
Thomas/Lyons-Weiler: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/17/22/8674
(14) The current National Health Survey of Children’s Health questionnaire from the US Census Bureau has 19 pages with some 170 questions, not one of which even remotely attempts to identify the vaccination status of the child. The first link below is for the main page where you can find links to all questionnaires used. The second link below is to the form for the youngest children. There are similar forms for schoolchildren and teens.
Questionnaires main page: https://www.census.gov/programs-surveys/nsch/technical-documentation/questionnaires.html
Health questionnaire for babies and young children https://www.census.gov/content/dam/Census/programs-surveys/nsch/tech-documentation/questionnaires/2020/NSCH-T1.pdf
(15) US population distribution by age 2019 – Kaiser
(16) A sampling of articles showing the benefits of having childhood illnesses
Acute infections as a means of cancer prevention (including measles benefits)
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0361090X06000043
Chicken pox in children associated with decreased risk of shingles in adults
History of chicken pox may reduce risk of brain cancer later in life
(17) Pfizer COVID Vaccine Trial Shows Alarming Evidence of Pathogenic Priming in Older Adults – Pathogenic priming (or antibody dependent immune enhancement) can cause vaccinated people to overreact when exposed to the wild virus, triggering a dangerous cytokine storm, which can lead to multiple organ failure and death.
https://childrenshealthdefense.org/defender/pfizer-covid-vaccine-trial-pathogenic-priming/