A special tribute to Del Bigtree (pictured) and his team at ICAN for his stunning 88 page letter to the HHS regarding vaccine safety. As Del reported - in the latest edition of Highwire - the letter, in response to an earlier reply from the then acting Director National Vaccine Program Office, Melinda Wharton, took virtually a year to compile, and is a meticulous piece of research. Most sensationally they researched the HHS claim through US government archives that at least some pediatric vaccines had been trialed against genuine placebo, and came to a negative conclusion. Not only that, they established that none of the vaccines those vaccines had been trialed against had ever been trialed against genuine placebo either. At the end of the line the toxic products were only being compared with other toxic products, rather than against saline.
Leave aside the sceptics, for any believer in the vaccine program as a necessary intervention in public health, this should be a devastating finding. Fundamentally, the research into the safety of any of the products before marketing was simply not there. The manufacturers apparently had no faith that their proto-products could withstand this scrutiny, and for the rest they just did not care: under the alleged imperative of protecting the population it seems anything went. So even before all the sham monitoring procedures and reviews which Del and his team dismantle in forensic detail we are left with the proposition that none of the present products being given to US children – and frequently other children across most of the developed world – have any meaningful pre-marketing safety data all. If you are believer in the program you have been let down: if you wanted a program with any pretensions to safety - supposing such a thing to be possible - it looks like you would have to start from scratch. The manufacturers did this: the governments, the politicians and the regulators (internationally) let it happen.
This damning document is published simultaneously with a demand in the UK from the Royal Society for Public Health (which I had never heard of) to shut down comment about vaccines on the web. It echoes calls from Seth Berkley of GAVI, Heidi Larson of the Vaccine Confidence Project and the European Parliament. The pamphlet airily dismisses concerns that vaccines have side effects or that you could possibly have too many. It is pure public relations, and if the RSPH claims to be "independent" it also admits that the publication was paid for by Merck, a detail which was reported by British Medical Journal and the Guardian, but not true to form by the BBC. We have, in truth, been building to this moment for two decades: as the evidence piles up that every single aspect of the program lacks integrity or is simply rotten to the core all the perpetrators can do is call for the silencing of their critics, and maintain the products are safe because they say so.
Please help give the ICAN letter the widest possible distribution, particularly to politicians.
"The outcome of disease always depends both on the virulence of the pathogen and the health of the individual immune system."
Nope. This makes no sense. Lots of people who seemed vibrant will get a very severe case of the same illness that a vulnerable baby overcomes in a day.
And under the germ theory it doesn't matter how strong your immune system *was*. Once it's been overcome by the pathogen it is every bit as weak as anybody else's with that pathogen.
What you say makes no sense. There's no reason for me to reply to you again.
"Why do you think that within a few years (not many) of the introduction of the vaccines for them, pertussis, measles, mumps, rubella, tetanus, diphtheria, Hib disease, and chickenpox (and others) almost entirely disappeared?"
Why do you keep asking this question when I've already provided the answer hundreds of times? Why are you so desperate to believe the people who you already recognize are harming our children?
Why would Walter Reed be any more trustworthy than Paul Offit or Senator Pan? Why would Jenner or Pasteur?
And you went no way to explaining my arguments against germ theory. If we are attacked by billions of viruses every day then if even a tiny fraction of them are pathogenic then we couldn't possibly survive. And even if we could, we would already be immune rendering every vaccine pointless. Once we had survived our first few days on earth, then we could never get sick again.
If that's wrong then we must conclude that precisely 0% of germs are pathogenic.
Plus your comment about the immune system completely misunderstood my point. The immune system does not allow us to overcome our math problem. In fact, it makes it worse.
You did provide one solitary example of a patient with what are presumably yellow fever symptoms but you didn't say whether they had been given any toxic medical treatments.
And like I said before, the whole "incubation period" is more than a little suspicious. Clearly they never found what they thought they would and just rigged the results to tell them what they want to hear.
Like every other germ theorist/vaccine promoter in history.
Many kinds of bacteria are constantly evolving and changing, like flu viruses. Others are more stable over time, like the yellow fever virus. Those that change develop new ways of infiltrating the cells of the organism being attacked (from our point of view, from its unconscious point of view, it's just carrying out its need to replicate, which it can only do inside the cells of its host). The changes which allow it to better infiltrate are more successful and result in more viruses with those traits.
Our immune system is designed to detect and destroy potentially dangerous invading pathogens. Many bacteria are usually harmless and absolutely necessary. The minority are dangerous, and most people's immune systems do a good job of analyzing them and killing them, often with no signs of disease. Others experience a clinical infection, and the immune system usually mounts a successful attack on them.
The outcome of disease always depends both on the virulence of the pathogen and the health of the individual immune system. Vaccines are usually effective in giving immunity to the targeted diseases. They also have many dangers which everyone should be aware of, and vaccines should be avoided whenever possible. But in the case of the most dangerous diseases, everyone should learn about them and think about what he wants to do to protect himself and his children from them, considering all the factors involved. And no one can have 100% certainty that he has made the right decision, but that's life. But if you live in the Congo and many people around you are currently dying of yellow fever, then that means that you yourself are at risk of being bitten by a loaded mosquito and getting, often dying, of yellow fever. The yellow fever vaccine is very effective at preventing yellow fever. From there, each person must make a choice.
At the end of this stage there is a remission of two or three days. About 80% of those with clinical disease recover at this point, with permanent immunity. The other 20% enter the toxic stage, with a return of the fever, black vomit (coffee-ground emesis), diarrhea, a slowing of the pulse (Faget's sign), jaundice, yellow eyes, yellow skin, and failure of the kidneys, liver, and heart. The patient gets a strange hiccup (like with Ebola, a related disease), falls into a coma, and dies. About half of those patients who enter the toxic stage dies, even now, even with the best of hospital care. The Faget's sign can also occur at the end of the first stage.
You asked specifically about the symptoms of the Americans on Dr. Reed's team who got yellow fever in Cuba in 1900. I'll give the passage from The American Plague (162-5), which describes the course of Jesse Lazear's illness. "In his logbook, Lazear wrote an unusual entry on September 13. In all cases before those, page after page of records, Lazear had used the soldier's name and simply the date he was bitten, with no other attention to the mosquito. A one-line entry with a name and a date. On that day, however, in his elegant hand, Lazear did not write the soldier's name, but instead wrote 'Guinea Pig No. 1.' He went on to write that this guinea pig had been bitten by a mosquito that developed from an egg laid by a mosquito that developed from an egg laid by a mosquito that fed on a number of yellow fever cases: Suarez, Hernández, De Long, Ferández. It was a precise, detailed history that proved beyond doubt that the mosquito was loaded with the virus when it bit a healthy soldier...(If he had entered his name, then his death would have been considered medical suicide by the insurance company, and his wife and two children would not have gotten any payment.) For the next few days, Lazear's life continued much as it had over the last few months in Cuba. He fed and cared for the mosquitoes in the lab. ..Then he began to lose his appetite. He skipped a few meals in the mess hall. He didn't mention it to anyone, nor did he ask to see one of the yellow fever doctors; instead, he worked hard in the lab trying to ignore the oncoming headache.
"On September 18, he complained of feeling 'out of sorts,' and stayed in his officer's quarters. His head pounded and L. decided to write a letter. ..(he wrote to his mother, and referred to his one-year old son Houston and the baby his wife Mabel was about to have: they were staying with his mother in the US). ..That night, L. started to feel chilled as the fever came on. He never went to sleep but worked at his desk all through the night, trying to get all the information about the mosquitoes organized. By morning, he showed all the signs of a severe attack of yellow fever. The camp doctors made the diagnosis, and L. agreed to go to the yellow fever ward. ..L. was carried by litter out of the two-room, white pine board house in which he had lived since he and Mabel first arrived in Cuba. ..(In the yellow fever ward, in a separate one-room building), Lena Warner (the immune nurse who had survived the yellow fever in 1878, when she was nine, and was found in her boarded-up house by a former slave who first thought she was dead, and carried her to safety) nursed J.L., recording his vitals. (I put up a link to his case record and vital signs last week. The surgeon general required that this record be made for every yellow fever patient.)... (On September 25,) Lena Warner braced L's arms with all of her weight, shouting for help. Still he bolted from the bed, darting around the small frame-wood room as wildly as a trapped insect beating against glass. Two soldiers ran into the ward, pinning L to his bed, tying restraints around his wrists and elbows. ..Warner sponged his body with iced whiskey and water. She recorded his temperature, which had held at 104 degrees for days, on the chart beside his bed. ..(Warner watched him sleep.) But the quiet did not last. L's body began to lurch, and black vomit rolled from his mouth; through the bar hanging above his hospital cot. He writhed in the bed, and his skin grew deep yellow. His 104 temperature slowly fell, leveling out 99 degrees, and JL died at 8:45 p.m. at the age of thirty-four."
As is obvious, there are many problems with vaccines. But, that being said, most of them usually work for a period of time to prevent the targeted diseases. The basic science behind vaccines is correct. Why do you think that within a few years (not many) of the introduction of the vaccines for them, pertussis, measles, mumps, rubella, tetanus, diphtheria, Hib disease, and chickenpox (and others) almost entirely disappeared? In the case of the routine childhood diseases, this was a bad thing, but it is a true thing.
Vaccines usually don't cause any obvious reactions. While they usually prevent the diseases, and that's why people continue to get them. With the increasing vaccination schedule, more and more are severely and permanently damaged, and it is immoral to mandate any vaccine for anyone for this reason. But it would also be immoral to prohibit vaccines for those who want them enough to take the risk.
Your article said as though it had any probative value that 90% of those who get pertussis had been vaxxed. The old DPT vaccine was MUCH more effective at preventing pertussis, but it was so dangerous (again, not to most, but to many), that developed countries replaced it with the acellular version, DTaP. From the beginning about twenty years ago, it was clear that it was not very effective and that huge numbers of vaxxed people got pertussis anyway, including my daughter who got pertussis at eight month old after having gotten three DTaPs. The pertussis vaccine continues to be very dangerous, and I do not recommend that anyone get it. It used to be a killer disease, but evolved to become much milder, to the extent that the disease is very rarely dangerous (usually only to newborns under three months old), while the vaccine is very dangerous. And they're trying to see how they can go back to the old DPT. This does not show that vaccine science has collapsed, but rather that the vaccine they developed to replace the DPT turned out to be much less effective than they first thought, while continuing to be much more dangerous than they first thought.
Your article extrapolated from that that modern medical science in general has collapsed, but that, again, is going too far. A older woman in Mexico City who is like my mother to me had a pacemaker inserted about two months ago to aid her failing heart, and it has restored her to optimism and energy, when she was despondent, weak, and close to death. I took my daughter to the dentist yesterday, who said she has three wisdom teeth coming in and that she said that the lower right one was sore. So, although I am cautious about X-rays, I made an appointment for a panoramic X-ray in a month to assess the wisdom teeth, and, if it seems appropriate, I'll take her to an oral surgeon to have one or more extracted under IV sedation, in his office, if possible (the dentist thought that it would be). And I am confident that there will be no serious problems, but this is thanks to technology and training in modern medicine that haven't been available for that long.
I think that everyone should inform himself on all medical procedures before agreeing to anything, but I also think that he should have access to any medical procedure which is reasonable (and opinions can differ as to that).
One problem is that you have not said how you think people should protect themselves against tetanus, bacterial meningitis, and yellow fever in the relevant cases, for example. These are diseases which healthy, well-nourished people used to die from very readily.
If most people stopped vaxxing and the mortality from these diseases rose to something like pre-vaccine levels, do you think they should just accept dying from them?
I put that in a separate paragraph because it is the crucial issue.
balinaheuchter Air Traffic Control You Tube - Colin Campbell example of - How to "Fudge a Nudge" -"Deal" or "No Deal" "Not in a month of Sundays" "No exceptions/no compromise?" -make a trade off -do an exception- everyone get's a good deal /good outcome!
Hans, you are right that we are looking at one of the biggest crimes in all history. When I read the story of that poor girl who was so healthy and is now confined to a wheelchair after getting her third Gardasil shot I could not believe that Merck could produce such a toxic vaccine and give it out to girls like it was something they absolutely had to have only to be mislead and made into cripples. Merck should be prosecuted for the damage they have done to so many girls who got the Gardasil vaccine and were physically debilitated for life. There is a place for the people who perpetrated this crime on young girls and women and it is called hell. They have destroyed people's lives and gotten away with it. My heart goes out to those who have suffered this damage for no damn good reason except to help make huge profits for Merck!
Here is the reason that the germ theory is nonsense.
1) Everyday we are bombarded with billions of germs. Presumably at least some of them are of the kind that germ theorists believe are dangerous (otherwise we would have to conclude that none of them are dangerous). So how do we survive?
2) Let's just say that we ignore 1 and imagine that, by way of magic, none of the billions of viruses we get bombarded with are pathogenic but all those that are are tucked away somewhere. Ok. But presumably they reside in sick people right? So where are there lots of sick people? Doctor offices and hospitals! So everybody must be dying the moment they enter these places right?
3) I love this one because I have never seen anybody else ever raise it. Under the germ theory there are no negative feedbacks. This makes a stable biological system by definition impossible. The immune system is *not* a negative feedback it is the opposite. It actually reinforces our math problem because the immune system will weaken as the number of pathogens increase.
There is no way of resolving this problem without a discontinuity. A Deus ex Machina as The Almighty Pill so beautifully put it. So the germ theory is quite literally, mathematically impossible.
There is as much chance of it being true as 2+2 = 5.
There are plenty of other massive problems with germ theory such as why did things like SARS and bird flu magically disappear? Why do we have the symptoms that we do? Is our body controlling the symptoms to help fight the germs and if so, why would suppressing the symptoms with antibiotics or Tamiflu be considered a good idea? If the virus is causing the symptoms then why would it cause these kinds of things?

Question: What were the vaccines trialed against?
Answer: Other toxic products.