Jennifer Lea Reynolds
February 4, 2016
A recent study conducted by Dr. Nancy Swanson and the President of the International Federation of Organic Agriculture Movements (IFOAM), Andre Leu, has reinforced what many have been convinced of all along: glyphosate, the main ingredient in Monsanto’s herbicide Roundup, is lethal. Their correlation study determined that it’s lethal even in small amounts, debunking the notion in which some people suggest that its levels are so low that it can’t possibly damage health.
The study, titled “Genetically engineered crops, glyphosate and the deterioration of health in the United States of America,” was published in the Journal of Organic Systems. First, United States government databases were reviewed to find GE crop data, disease epidemiological data and glyphosate application data. Then, the team conducted correlation analyses on 22 diseases in these data sets which revealed the disturbing discovery that the ingredient is indeed wreaking havoc on people’s health.
Glyphosate a “driver of mutations that lead to cancer”
Their findings state that “Glyphosate disrupts the endocrine system and the balance of gut bacteria, it damages DNA and is a driver of mutations that lead to cancer.” They noted that glyphosate applications are linked to a long list of ailments and chronic diseases ranging from stroke, cancers of the thyroid, bladder, pancreas, kidney and liver to autism, end stage renal disease, multiple sclerosis and inflammatory bowel disease.
The study draws eye-opening parallels to the fact that there’s been “A huge increase in the incidence and prevalence of chronic diseases” reported in the U.S. over the past two decades and that “During this same time period, there has been an exponential increase in the amount of glyphosate applied to food crops and in the percentage of GE food crops planted.
A senior scientist at MIT has declared that we are facing an epidemic of autism that may result in one half of all children being affected by autism in ten years.
Dr. Stephanie Seneff, who made these remarks during a panel presentation in Groton, MA last week, specifically cites the Monsanto herbicide, Roundup, as the culprit for the escalating incidence of autism and other neurological disorders. Roundup, which was introduced in the 1970’s, contains the chemical glyphosate, which is the focal point for Seneff’s concerns. Roundup was originally restricted to use on weeds, as glyphosate kills plants. However, Roundup is now in regular use with crops. With the coming of GMO’s, plants such as soy and corn were bioengineered to tolerate glyphosate, and its use dramatically increased. From 2001 to 2007, glyphosate use doubled, reaching 180 to 185 million pounds in the U.S. alone in 2007.
If you don’t consume corn- on- the -cob or toasted soybeans, however, you are hardly exempt from the potential affects of consuming glyphosate. Wheat is now sprayed with Roundup right before it is harvested, making any consumption of non- organic wheat bread a sure source for the chemical. In addition, any products containing corn syrup, such as soft drinks, are also carrying a payload of glyphosate.
According to studies cited by Seneff, glyphosate engages “gut bacteria” in a process known as the shikimate pathway. This enables the chemical to interfere with the biochemistry of bacteria in our GI tract, resulting in the depletion of essential amino acids .
January 19, 2016
Monsanto’s Round Up herbicide, containing the likely-carcinogenic glyphosate, is causing widespread mitochondrial dysfunction in cells. This is associated with a long list of degenerative disease and chronic health conditions including autism, Alzheimer’s, chronic fatigue, fibromyalgia, type 2 Diabetes, Parkinson’s, and obesity.
The mitochondria of our cells complete some of the most important functions of cellular respiration. This is how our cells eat, excrete, and repair themselves. Mitochondria are like the batteries of the cell. They create metabolic energy through ATP. If the mitochondria, well-defined cytoplasmic organelles of the cell are damaged, the cell cannot function.
As Pamela Coleman, PhD from Farm and Food Policy and an Analyst for the Cornucopia Institute has said:
“Contrary to the current widely-held misconception that glyphosate is relatively harmless to humans, the available evidence shows that glyphosate may rather be the most important factor in the development of multiple chronic diseases and conditions that have become prevalent in Westernized societies.”
One thing that one particular individual stated that the tone of the book seemed like the author offered a ‘miracle’ cure. That was never something that seemed for me to be the case. A treatment, by definition, is not a cure. If after conquering whatever disease it might be, if an individual opts to stop this ‘treatment’ its very likely that disease will crop up once more.
Dr. Natasha Campbell-McBride grounds the data provided in this book with an overwhelming amount of scientific evidence. Anyone looking for quick ‘miracles’ is sadly mistaken.
This book can help people, but its hard work – a lot of hard work. There are no guarantees however.
The human body is a constellations of systems within systems all performing a synergistic dance that makes us who we are. When portions of this system is out of balance – even just one aspect – there can be quite the detrimental side effects thereafter.
Given that, this book has helped a large amount of people that have opted to follow the diet/data provided here.
Am just mentioning Balantyne’s book for those looking for more research into diet and how that can help one overcome [or at least move into the right direction] the countless diseases plaguing individuals nowadays.
As a person who has had Ulcerative Colitis, a sound diet has been a life saver for me, literally. This hasn’t come easy.
The title of this book doesn’t mention UC outright, however, the disease is definitely mentioned in the book, and more importantly, the issue of ‘leaky gut’ is tackled rather incisively. This is important because gut issues are present in all unhealthy people. When you look at disease from this angle, there is a lot of knowledge to be had for those seeking to why dis-ease is as wide spread as it is, as well as what are some of the things one can do to begin moving forward.
Getting back to a previous point, the diet component is not easy. It is possible however. If such wasn’t the case, so many people wouldn’t be giving this particular review and sharing anecdotal data of their successes and such.
For me personally, the sugar component was the hardest thing to overcome. Overcoming this factor is absolutely imperative for people to overcome if one wants regain their health.
Sugar is absolutely widespread in our culture these days, and it causes way more problems that can be listed here. As Campbell-Mcbride elucidates the average western person consumes about 160-200 lbs of sugar a year. Not only that, but sugar itself fuels Candida, and worse, cancer. And that’s just one component in the diet. The author mentions countless ones that cause deleterious issues.
Its important to know what causes dis-ease in our modern society, and this book does a particularly poignant job in shedding light into many confusing aspects of diet.
This book had been recommended to me years ago, and made the mistake of not getting it. If you have been interested in this book, don’t make the same mistake that was done by me. If you’re already here, you’ve probably heard of the work done by the author and whatnot, and are familiar with some of the progress that has taken place by people that have been willing to approach this with an open mind.
After being hospitalized countless times [almost every other year [and sometimes consecutive years ongoing] for many years and sometimes staying for weeks], and having been out of remission with UC for years at a time, something had to be done.
The solutions outlined by doctors were just not cutting it for me. Nothing was working. This was why it was easy to realize that big changes had to be implemented if a healthy life was going to be attainable for me again.
This book by Dr. Natasha Campbell-McBride, as well as Balantyne’s book The Paleo Approach were very instrumental in me regaining my health. There are many options out there. Am just putting light to the information in hopes that perhaps in the future this help can help others as its helped me.
This is just speaking from personal experience. Take that for what it’s worth.
Topics such as the gut, the immune system, gut flora [and all its components] as well as even the gut-brain connection are all written about quite well. Toxins of all kinds are also broken down so to speak.
Within the recommended diet portion of the book, the most important and beneficial dietary changes that can be had are spoken about at length, as well as the top influences that help the immune system, as well as the ones that damage it, are also touched upon.
There really is a lot of vital information to be had by this book. The strength of it lies in how it allows the reader to realize the importance of gut health is, given the little amount of information coming out from the medical establishment.
In any case, there is extensive information for people whether they are at a beginner level, or come from a more experienced area in relation to these topics.
This is the type of information you wish everyone within the medical fields [and all education for that matter] were exposed too. That’s fantasy thinking however.
In the real world, the individual needs to do everything he can to regain their health, and its their responsibility to do that. This book helps you along that journey.
As mentioned before, a mistake was made by me years ago in not getting the book when it was extremely recommended by a dear friend of mine who had many health issues they conquered. Don’t make the same mistake.
If you’re interested, by all means go ahead. You will not regret it.
In August 2014, it was revealed that senior Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) scientist William Thompson had been having numerous conversations with vaccine critic Brian Hooker in which Thompson noted that the data from one of his studies had been massaged prior to publication in order to conceal a link between the MMR vaccine and autism in black boys.
By: David Gutierrez
In a new book, Vaccine Whistleblower: Exposing the Autism Research Fraud at the CDC, attorney Kevin Barry examines the content of ten months worth of conversations between Thompson and Hooker, which were recorded prior to September 2014.
Hooker is a bioengineer and a professor of biology and chemistry at Simpson University. He has spent 12 years using Freedom of Information Act requests to obtain data on studies the CDC has conducted on a possible link between vaccines and autism, and he has submitted many of his findings to Congress.
Omitted data shows autism link
According to Thompson, he was unaware that his conversations with Hooker were being recorded. After his name was outed as a CDC informant without his permission, he hired a law firm specializing in whistleblower protection and released a public statement through them.
“I regret that my coauthors and I omitted statistically significant information in our 2004 article published in the journal Pediatrics,” the press statement reads. “The omitted data suggested that African American males who received the MMR vaccine before age 36 months were at increased risk for autism. Decisions were made regarding which findings to report after the data were collected, and I believe that the final study protocol was not followed.”
Thompson notes that while he considers himself pro-vaccination, he believes that the CDC’s decision making and data analysis needs to be transparent.
“My concern has been the decision to omit relevant findings in a particular study for a particular sub- group for a particular vaccine,” his statement reads. “There have always been recognized risks for vaccination and I believe it is the responsibility of the CDC to properly convey the risks associated with receipt of those vaccines.”
Among the revelations in the book is the repeated admission by Thompson to Hooker that the mercury-containing thimerosal, which has long been used as a preservative in vaccines and is still used in flu shots and adult-only vaccines, causes “tics.”
“I can say tics are four times more prevalent in kids with autism,” Thompson elaborates at one point. “There is biologic plausibility right now to say that thimerosal causes autism-like features.'”
The book also reveals more details about the data coverup that Thompson referenced in his August 2014 public statement. It reveals that because the data from that study was modified to show no link with autism, the controversy was rapidly declared settled. “Because the CDC researchers omitted significant data, the flow of research was diverted away from vaccination,” Barry writes.
Thompson claims that his studies were “watered down” and his data was “omitted.”
“The whole system is paralyzed right now,” he says of the CDC’s research into a vaccine-autism connection.
Barry’s book uses Thompson’s testimony to suggest that at best, the CDC is incompetent and misguided on this issue. At worst, to use Thompson’s word from the tapes, the agency is actually “crooked.”
Rates of autism have ballooned from about 1 in 10,000 in 1960 to an astonishing 1 in 68 today. Over the same time period, the number of vaccines on the childhood schedule has also dramatically expanded. Page 107 of Vaccine Whistleblower contains the 1983 and 2015 recommended vaccine schedules; the former has ten shots for three vaccines by age four, while the current schedule has 27 shots for more than 12 vaccines by age six.
If you watch television for three or more hours a day, your risk of premature death is double that of someone who watches only one hour or less, according to new research published in the Journal of the American Heart Association.1 The health risks of too much sedentary behavior, including too much sitting, are now widely known.
An earlier study, published in 2009, also linked sitting with biomarkers of poor metabolic health, showing how total sitting time correlates with an increased risk of type 2 diabetes, heart disease, and other prevalent chronic health problems,2 which explains why it could easily increase your risk of premature death.
What’s interesting about the current study, however, is that it didn’t compare television watching to other more active activities… it compared it to computer usage and driving time – two activities that also involve sitting.
Somewhat surprisingly, computer use and driving time were not associated with an increased risk of death the way television watching was, which begs the question, is TV damaging to your health in other ways beyond sitting?
How Does Watching TV Damage Your Health?
While no link was found between using a computer or driving and premature death, for every two additional hours spent watching TV, a person’s risk of death from heart disease rose by 44 percent and risk of death from cancer climbed by 21 percent.3
The researchers were skeptical, so they set out to examine other variables that might be driving up death rates linked to TV watching, like increased consumption of processed foods and sugary drinks (widely known to rise with television viewing), smoking, an unrelated serious illness, following (or not following) a Mediterranean diet, age, sex, and weight.
The results linking television time and premature death still held strong, which suggests television may be uniquely damaging. The study’s authors suggested part of the problem may be the extremely sedentary nature of television watching. When you’re driving or working at a computer, your body moves (albeit minimally) and your mind is engaged, which are not the case when watching TV.
Although not addressed in the study, exposure to light at night, even from your television, can also interfere with your body’s circadian rhythm and hormone production, wreaking havoc on your health. So this may be yet another way television is associated with chronic disease.
Furthermore, watching TV actually has a major impact on your brain chemistry, and the longer you watch, the easier your brain slips into a receptive, passive mode, meaning that messages are streamed into your brain without any participation from you. Dr. Aric Sigman, a British psychologist, analyzed 35 different scientific studies on television and its effect on the viewer.4
He found the damage comes not from the TV programs themselves, but from the vast amount of time kids, in particular, are spending watching television and computer screens. This activity produces an almost narcotic effect on your brain, actually numbing areas that would be stimulated by other activities, like reading. Dr. Sigman has identified 15 negative effects that he believes can be blamed on watching television, stating:5
“Watching television, irrespective of the content, is increasingly associated with unfavorable biological and cognitive changes. These alterations occur at viewing levels far below the population norm.
Given the population’s sheer exposure time to this environmental factor it is more than puzzling to consider how little awareness and action has resulted.”
The risks Dr. Sigman revealed include:
Decreased attention span
Limited brain growth
TV Increases the Time You Spend Sitting in a Completely Relaxed State
Too much sitting, whether in front of a computer, in your car or watching television, should be avoided for optimal health. And it makes sense that TV watching may be the worst of the sitting offenders, drawing your body and mind into a completely sedentary, passive state. At least with driving and computer usage, the study’s author explained:6
“You have tension in your muscles. You are moving little parts of your body, like your hands. You are not completely relaxed as you are when you are watching television.”
Instead of parking yourself in front of the TV at night, consider doing something else, or at the very least engage in some minor activity while the TV is on. The reason this is so critical for your health is that when you move, you increase the force of gravity on your body.
Anti-gravity environments speed up cellular deterioration; this we know from astronauts in outer space. Dr. Joan Vernikos,7 former director of NASA’s Life Sciences Division and author of Sitting Kills, Moving Heals, was in fact one of the primary doctors assigned to keep NASA astronauts from deteriorating in space.
In an anti-gravity situation, your body deteriorates at a far more rapid pace, and interestingly enough, sitting for an extended period of time simulates a low-gravity type environment for your body. The key is to disengage from this low anti-gravity situation as much as possible using intermittent movement.
The Health Damage of Too Much Sitting Is Well Established
There may be some differing health effects between sitting for different activities (television versus reading, for instance), but as these continue to be explored, know this: even if you are a fit athlete who exercises regularly, you may still endanger your health simply by sitting too much. For example, one 2012 analysis that looked at the findings from 18 studies found that those who sat for the longest periods of time were twice as likely to have diabetes or heart disease, compared to those who sat the least.8
Besides increasing your risk of metabolic problems, researchers warn that the combination of sitting too much and exercising too little can more than double the risk of heart failure in men.9Last year, a Swedish study also concluded that those who live a generally active life have better heart health and live longer than those who remain sedentary for most of the day.10 This held true even for those who didn’t engage in a regular exercise routine. The study revealed:11
Those who reported overall higher levels of daily intermittent movement suffered fewer heart-related problems
For every 100 of the sedentary people who experienced a heart attack or stroke, only 73 of the highly active group had such an event
For every 100 of the least active who died, only 70 of the most active died
Those who had high daily activity levels and engaged in a regular exercise program had the lowest risk profiles overall
Try These Intermittent Movement Activities While You Watch TV
There are many reasons to limit the amount of television in your life, but when you do watch it, make it a point to get up every 15 minutes. Dr. Vernikos’ research demonstrated that the minimum number of times you need to interrupt your sitting in order to counteract its cardiovascular health risks is in the neighborhood of 35 times per day. Her research clearly shows that sitting down and standing up repeatedly for 35 minutes does NOT have the same effect as standing up once, 35 times over the course of the entire day.
I suggest you take a break to do one set of three exercises, anywhere from once every 15 minutes to once per hour. I personally am very disciplined and committed to doing these movements at least once every 15 minutes. This is important not only during television watching but also during other types of screen time or while you’re doing desk work.
The following videos, featuring Jill Rodriguez, offer a series of helpful intermittent movement beginner exercises you can do virtually anywhere. For a demonstration of each technique, please see the corresponding video in the table below. The videos use a desk for demonstration purposes, but you could also use the back of a chair, a coffee table, or the back of your couch for support.
Technique #1: Standing Neck-Stretch: Hold for 20 seconds on each side.
Technique #2: Shoulder Blade Squeeze: Round your shoulders, then pull them back and pull down. Repeat for 20-30 seconds.
Technique #3: Standing Hip Stretch: Holding on to your desk, cross your left leg over your right thigh and “sit down” by bending your right leg. Repeat on the other side.
Technique #4: The Windmill: Stand with feet shoulder-width apart, then pivot your feet to the right. Push your hip out to the left. Raising your left arm skyward, and your right arm toward the floor, lower your body toward the floor while looking up, then raise your torso back to standing position. Repeat on the other side.
Technique #5: Side Lunge: Starting with your feet together, take a medium step sideways, and bend down as if you’re about to sit. Use your arms for balance by reaching out in front of you. Return to starting position, and repeat 10-20 times. Repeat on the other side.
Technique #6: Desk Push-Up: Place hand a little wider than shoulder-width apart on your desk. Come up on your toes to make it easier to tip forward. Lower your chest to the edge of the desk, and push back up. Do 10 repetitions.
Technique #7: Squat to Chair: With your feet shoulder-width apart, sit down, reaching forward with your hands, and stand back up in quick succession. Do 15-20 repetitions.
Technique #8: Single Leg Dead Lift: Place your right hand on your desk, and place your weight on your right leg. Fold your torso forward, while simultaneously lifting your left leg backward. Do 10 repetitions on each side.
Technique #9: Mountain Climber: Get into a push-up position on the floor. Pull your right knee forward to touch your right wrist or arm, then return to push-up position. Repeat on the other side. Try to pick up the pace, and do 20 quick repetitions.
The vast majority of scientists, physicians, nurses, and public health educators trust that the ingredients in a vaccine have been individually and synergistically proven safe and effective. The public believes that these vaccines, aside from their specified virus(es), are sterile solutions, free from undesirable contaminants not listed on the manufacturers’ package inserts. When the pediatrician injects a vaccine into the muscle of a child, the parents’ unquestioning faith is that this is the case. In other words, we want to believe that vaccines have been generated under perfect conditions for the safety of children and ourselves.
What Is Not on Insert Labels?
Our investigation shows that most people do not know what is actually in a vaccine: the active ingredients listed on product labels, the inert ingredients, and, most important, the hidden ingredients. Even more remote is taking the time to actually study the subject matter, review the scientific literature, and discover the truth for oneself. To our amazement, that truth was easy to find. But it is a truth that will scare the hell out of you.
Imagine sitting down to eat veal parmigiana, and a video is placed on your table and used as a living reality recipe instead of the actual meal. This video displays every step in the calf’s life, from its birth to the parmigiana on your plate. You witness how the little creature was starved of its natural nutrients, kept in a tiny stall, grossly malnourished and deformed, filled with antibiotics, diseased and suffering complete privation until finally slaughtered, cooked, and served on your plate. Would your appetite be the same? Would you still desire the parmigiana?
Conveniently, we rarely ask, where does our food come from? How and where was it grown? What was sprayed on it prior to our consumption? Thus we are going to re-record something that even most top health educators and opinion leaders on vaccines are unaware of: what goes into the making of vaccines, and what is hidden from you that should give you pause? Afterward, ask yourself: do you want vaccines in your body?
For the most in-depth, honest, scholarly, and objective examination of the methods by which vaccines and their hidden ingredients are prepared, we turn to award-winning British investigative medical journalist Janine Roberts, who paints an entirely different picture of the darker inferno in vaccines that does not appear on product labels. This is the same Janine Roberts who brought to the world’s attention blood diamonds, genocide in the Congo, and the destruction of aboriginal cultures by the Australian government.
Roberts’s account of conversations between high-level members from the World Health Organization (WHO), federal health agencies, and expert vaccine scientists who determine whether a certain vaccine will be approved, is horrid. Her investigations are based on official meeting documents and her attendance at emergency vaccine meetings, and confirm that our world’s vaccine and health experts agree that there is no solution in sight to resolve the potential threats posed by these hidden ingredients.1
The story begins with the vaccine industrial complex’s attempt to reduce manufacturing costs by seeking government approval to use cancerous cell lines in the development of vaccines. The industry’s rationale is that cancerous cells are “immortal.” Current vaccine methodology relies on animal cells, such as fertilized hen embryos and monkey kidneys, that die quickly in culture. Using cancerous cell lines is also much cheaper than relying on the purchase of animals, especially monkeys, that need to be sacrificed for vaccine substrates.
Roberts records two separate meetings – a meeting of the Vaccine and Related Biological Products Advisory Committee on November 9, 1998, and a subsequent gathering of the Evolving Scientific and Regulatory Perspective Workshop less than a year later. The conversations were conducted at a scientific level between top officials and expert scientists from the FDA, Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research (CBER), the National Institute of Allergies and Infectious Diseases (NIAID), the WHO, and others, each providing evidence and/or confirmation that all vaccines are dangerously contaminated.
Conversations focused primarily on the influenza, MMR, and yellow fever vaccines, which rely on fertilized chicken eggs for their culturing viruses. Fertilized chicken eggs, while ideally suited for culturing certain viruses for vaccines, such as the influenza and MMR vaccines, are also living incubators for large numbers of known and unknown viruses in the animal kingdom. While these do not transmit from their animal host to humans naturally, they nevertheless are sequential genetic codes that, when injected into the human body, have the potential for any number of unpredictable adverse effects by interfering or merging with the codes of human cells.
Vaccine research is at best a primitive science, because it involves injecting into the bloodstream foreign substances, chemical and genetic, that would not otherwise naturally enter the body. When we bring into the equation the enormous amount of known and unknown genetic material and foreign proteins that vaccines introduce into the body, and then consider the rapid increase in epidemics raging through the American population – adult diabetes in children, large numbers of various inflammatory and immune deficiency diseases, asthma and new allergies, severe gastrointestinal disorders (e.g., leaky gut syndrome and Crohn’s disease), chronic fatigue syndrome, and many different neurological disorders (e.g., autism, ADD and ADHD, Parkinson’s, Alzheimer’s) – we must step back and reconsider their causes. We should avoid the kind of faith that the vaccine industrial complex has in its determinist, reductionist perspective of genetic materialism to find these answers without taking into account the bombardment of toxic chemicals such as vaccine adjuvants and preservatives, extraneous genetic material, pathogenic organisms, and foreign genetic fragments that assault our bodies from shortly after birth into old age.
For some time, it was known that the enzyme reverse transcriptase (RT) was present in final vaccine solutions. RT has been used to this day as an indicator that there is a presence of a retrovirus. During the meeting’s proceedings, the WHO decided to withhold public announcement of such genetic contamination, in this case concerning the MMR vaccine; not to remove it from the market; and, in the meantime, continue safety studies at various laboratories.
Roberts reports that Dr. Arifa Khan from the FDA confirmed:
The RT activity in the vaccine was associated with retrovirus particles from two separate viral strains: Avian Leuokosis Virus (ALV) and Equine Arteritis Virus (EAV). The former was especially disturbing because ALV is a leukemia cancer, and Dr. Khan stated: “There was a theoretical possibility that the virus [ALV] could … infect the [human] cell.”
In summary, this means the ALV genetic code could integrate with human DNA, hence causing some kind of cancer.
The FDA’s reassurance that the ALV RT activity was safe is based on laboratory observations that there was no viral–human DNA merger activity for “a full 48 hours.” This kind of assurance is almost nonsensical and flies in the face of scientific reasoning, since cancers can take years to develop!
As a side note, RT activity is one of the stalwarts of the HIV/AIDS hypothesis. An article, “Influenza & Nursing Home Deaths” published by Canada’s Vaccine Risk Awareness Network, reports that some studies, and even some vaccine package inserts, “indicate that vaccinations increase HIV viral replication.”2 This means that all vaccines stimulate a strong suppressive effect on the immune system. Under stress conditions, viruses turn hyperactive and increase their ability to replicate.
The other risk stated by the FDA official was the possibility of the ALV sequence’s merging with the measles virus, hence creating a completely new, mutant, and dangerous virus. (This could also apply equally to the H1N1 swine flu and any other flu vaccines). As an aside, the world-renowned British geneticist Dr. Mae-Wan Ho from the Institute of Science in Society wrote:
“Vaccines themselves can be dangerous, especially live, attenuated viral vaccines or the new recombinant nucleic acid vaccines, they have the potential to generate virulent viruses by recombination and the recombinant nucleic acids could cause autoimmune disease.”3
During the meeting, Dr. Andrew Lewis, then head of the DNA Virus Laboratory in the Division of Viral Products, confirmed: “All the egg-based vaccines are contaminated. … These fertilized chicken eggs are susceptible to a wide variety of viruses.” The participants also realized that only a very small fraction of these small contaminants have been identified and there are likely hundreds more to be discovered.
Roberts found a 2001 CDC report showing that RT investigative studies for both the ALV and EAV retroviruses were conducted in 100 patients receiving the MMR vaccine. They found undesirable “RT activity in all measles vaccine lots from different manufacturers tested.” Their conclusion is that “this occurrence is not sporadic and that vaccine recipients may be universally exposed to these [chicken] retroviral particles.”
In a separate National Institutes of Health transcript of a meeting, Dr. Conroy of the World Health Organization stated that EAV viruses are found in all fertilized chicken eggs. There appears to be little change in the scientific protocol for making the influenza, MMR, and yellow fever vaccines. The current release of intramuscular H1N1 vaccines for the global market relies on the use of fertilized chicken embryos. This includes each of the approved vaccines by CSL, Medimmune, Novartis, and Sanofi-Pasteur, as well as GlaxoSmithKline’s, if and when it is approved in the US.
A later meeting of the FDA’s Scientific and Regulatory Perspective Workshop, without the press, was convened on September 7, 1999, in Washington, DC, and attended by “representatives from all the largest public health institutions in the West.” The following are summaries of key points and statements raised during this meeting as recorded in Janine Roberts’s invaluable book Fear of the Invisible.
It was reconfirmed that vaccines are “widely contaminated by viral and DNA genetic code fragments, many viruses and proteins.” There was expressed concern that these may also contain prions (tiny proteins responsible for incurable diseases and neurological disorders in both humans and animals) and oncogenes (a gene that turns normal cells into cancerous ones). One attendee, Dr. Goldberg, stated, “There are countless thousands of undiscovered viruses, proteins and similar particles. We have only identified a very small part of the microbial world – and we can only test for those we have identified. Thus the vaccine cultures could contain many unknown particles.”
Dr. Andrew Lewis of the FDA said that a brand-new monkey-human mutant virus was created during the course of developing an adenovirus vaccine with adenvovirus-SV40 hybrid viruses. Dr. Lewis also worried that “foreign cellular DNA” common in childhood vaccines could include “viral oncogenes” capable of causing cancer.
The scientists presented a question to themselves as to whether an attenuated vaccine strain could revert into a variant virus capable of replicating so fast that it would cause AIDS. They agreed that they were unable to answer this question.
On the question of whether mutation events could occur in children after vaccination, the answer was: “Recombination among a variety of viruses [contaminant viruses] and cells co-infected in tissue culture is not uncommon.” What this basically means is that because it is “not uncommon” for genetic codes of both contaminant viruses and living cells to recombine and create mutations in laboratory cultures, this can certainly occur in a child’s body after vaccination.
Dr. Hana Golding, chief of CBER’s Laboratory of Retrovirus Research, raised the fear that although DNA fragment contaminants in vaccines may be thought dead, they could remain active and dangerous. This meant that the codes of these contaminants could combine in vaccines and create new mutant strains of pathogens.
Dr. Leonard Hayflick, a virologist at both Stanford and the University of California, San Francisco, raised a concern that the common primary culture used for making vaccines with animals and bird embryos has created a situation where it is “apparent that these cells contained many unwanted viruses, some of which were lethal to humans.” This was especially worrisome of those vaccines, such as polio, which still rely on monkey kidney cells that have contributed to widespread death and illness.
One of the UK’s leading vaccine experts, Dr. Phil Minor from the National Institute of Biological Standards and Control, noted that some cases of polio vaccine are polluted with more monkey virus, SV40, than actual poliovirus. Although the uninitiated who are not informed about closed-door vaccine science have been led to assume that SV40 was no longer in polio vaccines at the time of this meeting, the conversations confirmed that it was still in use. This is another example of conspiracy at high levels among the vaccine industrial complex and government health officials to withhold information that directly affects the citzens’ well-being.
Dr. Rebecca Sheets, from the CBER’s laboratory responsible for monitoring vaccine safety, stated that the national health organizations had no control over how vaccines were made. In short, they could make recommendations, but the vaccine industrial complex was free to act as it chooses.
It is impossible to remove DNA contaminants from vaccines. Although weight limits for contaminating DNA were set by the FDA as far back as 1986, vaccine makers have never been able to reach that goal. The CDC decided to limit its weight recommendation to cancerous cell lines and then increase the other DNA contamination allowance 100-fold. However, these limits are only “recommendations,” and therefore the FDA cannot enforce them. Vaccine manufacturers are still free to choose whether to take scientific measures to reduce contaminants.
Remember, this contamination limit (10 nanograms) only applies to a single vaccine. Children today are inoculated with many vaccines before entering school, each with unique DNA and viral contaminants due to the specific cell substrates used for a given vaccine. This toxic genetic soup is what then flows through a vaccinated person’s body.
One government health official stated: “I chaired the committee that licensed the chickenpox vaccine, and it [residual DNA] was actually an issue that we considered at that time. We looked among recipients of the vaccine for evidence of an autoimmune response associated with the DNA included in that vaccine. … Actually, we didn’t look, we asked the company to look and they did not find one.” Well, of course, only such assurances can be convincing if in fact the company conducted the study, for which there was no compulsory reason to. Clearly, what the official is saying is that health authorities may not possess any documents that such a study actually exists.
Can vaccine DNA contamination cause cancer or autoimmune disease? A meeting participant responded: “When you consider that almost every one of these vaccines is injected right into the tissue … I think you couldn’t do much more to get the DNA expressed [to get contaminating DNA taken up by human cells] than to inject it into a muscle in the way it’s being done.”
Again, CBER’s Dr. Sheets: “I think that the vast majority of licensed vaccines, US licensed vaccines, have not been tested for residual DNA.”
A more frightening question was raised as to whether there has been any presence of foamy virus. Foamy virus (HFV in human form and its more widespread parent SFV from monkeys), although not infectious, is a deadly carcinogen. To the participants’ knowledge, no laboratory has ever searched for it in vaccine preparations.
The meeting confirmed that a particular cell, “which under many conditions is neoplastic [tumor causing],” has been licensed for the production of both injectible and oral polio vaccines in the US, Thailand, Belgium, and France. Therefore, these vaccines carry the high risk of containing cancer-causing oncogenes.
There’s no shortage of stories detailing conflicts of interest—so many in fact that you may be getting sick and tired of hearing of them. However, this is a truly important issue that must be tackled, and one of the ways of doing that is by exposing it to the harsh light of day. As long as people remain unaware, or turn a blind eye, it will continue unabated.
The price we pay for not paying attention is the loss of health, as the information disseminated by grossly compromised health agencies is skewed in favor of various industries, with Big Pharma leading the pack as one of the most powerful political and governmental influences.
Here, I will review two important revolving-door cases, and while neither is recent news, many of you may still be unaware of them.
Former CDC Director Now President of Merck’s Vaccine Unit
In the summer of 2011, Merck president Julie Gerberding said in a news interview1 that she’s “very bullish on vaccines,” as she recounted the various ways she helps Merck sell its products. What she didn’t divulge was her motivation for leaving her job as director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC)—an agency charged with overseeing vaccines and drug companies—and join Merck in the first place, back in January 2010.
If you don’t see the enormity of the influence her former high-level ties to the CDC can have, just consider the fact that Merck makes 14 of the 17 pediatric vaccines recommended by the CDC, and 9 of the 10 recommended for adults, and while vaccine safety advocates are trying to rein in the number of vaccines given to babies, safety concerns keep falling on deaf ears. The vaccine industry is booming, and it’s become quite clear that profit potential is the driving factor behind it.
One of the reasons for this is because vaccine patents do not expire like drugs do, so each vaccine adopted for widespread use has the potential to make enormous, continuous profits for decades to come. Vaccine makers also enjoy a high degree of immunity against lawsuits—and in the case of pandemic vaccines, absolute immunity—so the financial liability when something goes wrong is very low, compared to drugs.
Gerberding has a Long History of Disregard for Vaccine Safety
Joining a parade of other high-ranking government officials who pass through the revolving doors between government and Big Pharma, Gerberding left a trail of controversy behind her when she left the CDC. While a 2009 article by the Institute for Southern Studies lists a number of them2, I believe they left out the most important ones, namely her misinformation campaign about the pandemic swine flu vaccine, as well as her naive stance on vaccine safety issues in general.
The CDC disseminated extremely exaggerated data on the 2009 H1N1 “pandemic” and urged almost everyone in the U.S. to take the new, untested vaccines. When questions arose, they blocked CBS’s requests for samples of the swine flu cases and added obstacles to getting information. Despite the many dangers that have since been linked to the hastily developed vaccine—including the confirmed link to narcolepsy—the H1N1 vaccine is now part and parcel of the “regular” seasonal flu vaccine, although most people are completely unaware of this fact. And the CDC is now, for the first time ever, urging the seasonal flu vaccine on everyone in the country, from six months’ of age until death.
Even more disturbing, the CDC withheld data on miscarriages from the H1N1 vaccines under Gerberding’s lead, while insisting that pregnant women be put first in line to receive it. This was a dramatic reversal of its own recommendations. More than 3,500 post-vaccination miscarriages may have simply been ignored by the CDC.
One of Merck’s potentially most dangerous vaccines right now is Gardasil; a vaccine that so far has been linked to thousands of adverse events and at least 49 unexplained deaths. It’s a situation that the FDA and CDC have repeatedly denied, even as the adverse reports mount.
Gerberding’s 2004 report to Congress, ‘Prevention of Genital Human Papillomavirus Infection‘3 likely played a significant role in getting the controversial vaccine approved in the first place. Needless to say, the approval of this questionable vaccine guaranteed her future employer billions of dollars-worth of profits. Gerberding has also been a staunch defender of thimerosal, the mercury-based preservative used in many vaccines, and has consistently denied any links between vaccines and autism.
All in all, Gerberding has repeatedly demonstrated that safety is nowhere on her list of priorities or concerns when it comes to vaccines. It’s easy to see why Merck would want her to head up their vaccine unit. For the rest of us, however, her blatant disregard for proven vaccine safety is bad news indeed.
Former NIH Director Now Heads Sanofi Research Labs
Another former government official who’s switched sides is Elias Zerhouni, former director of the National Institutes of Health (NIH)—one of the world’s foremost medical research centers, and an agency of the US Department of Health and Human Services. Zerhouni is now head of Sanofi-Aventis’ research labs4. He also is a professor at Johns Hopkins School of Medicine; a member of the Board of Trustees at the Mayo Clinic; and is a senior fellow for the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation’s Global Health Program5.
As pointed out in a recent article by Forbes Magazine6, Zerhouni is no stranger to controversies over conflicts-of-interest.
In the fall of 2003, the NIH with Zerhouni at its head faced grave accusations when it came to light that hundreds of its scientists had financial ties to the medical and pharmaceutical industries. According to a 2004 article in the NIH Record7, over 100 scientists did not get approval for their industry activities, even though the rules were so loose virtually all requests to conduct outside work were approved by the agency, without any limits on compensation or hours worked for outside entities.
In one case, an academic scientist was found to have a financial interest in a therapy that ended up killing a patient. The case served as a potent warning of how dangerous such conflicts of interest can be. While Zerhouni managed to emerge from the 2003 debacle looking like a good crisis manager, the following paragraphs from the NIH Record8 are quite telling. Essentially, Zerhouni dissuaded Congress from doing the right thing, which is ban all outside activities of those working for the NIH, limiting the restrictions for conflicts of interest to upper level management only:
“[Zerhouni] disclosed that “initially, Congress truly wanted to ban [all outside activities], and the members of the committee have been very public about that…I was fortunate to be able to make contact with legislators and to help them understand what happened, how it happened, and why [a draconian response] might not be the right thing to do.”
Zerhouni said that over the course of long discussion, a good consensus emerged that formed the basis of NIH’s approach to the issue: stewards of public funds should never be vulnerable even to the perception that their activities could result in private gain. The top concern, he said, is, “How do you keep a true firewall and separation between the public trust — the money the public has given us in trust — and the activities of those who manage that resource?”
He doesn’t think it was well appreciated outside of NIH that the agency “has a dual nature — number one, we are a granting agency, but number two, we are also one of the most advanced, most capable biomedical research institutions in the world.
So we’re both sort of an academic, scientific research place, and yet next to that we’re also a government agency with its own rules and regulations…I said, look, we need to build a firewall around those who have fiduciary responsibility relative to the government, and those who do not. And that’s where we came up with these much more stringent rules for directors, deputy directors, and people who have those authorities, versus those who do not.”
Below follow a diverse set of studies that detail some of the dangers in vaccinations.
The information was found at LearnTheRisk.org
Although most of the links as of this date are currently working, a handful of links below do not work. The links that do not work have strikethroughs running through them. In many cases, was able to find another link that provides the same information, and that particular link is shown below the one that didn’t work. This is so any person gathering data is still able to find said information and sift through it as needed.
If the title of the study has a strikethrough through it, then the information is not provided any longer. The link/data is still shown in order to show the educated reader that there was at one point data in said link, but it has been erased/moved for whatever reason. Hope that helps.
Studies on the Dangers of Vaccine Ingredients:
Adverse events following immunization with vaccines containing adjuvants. Immunol Res, 2013
Review of the United States universal varicella vaccination program: Herpes zoster incidence rates, costeffectiveness, and vaccine efficacy based primarily on the Antelope Valley Varicella Active Surveillance Project data.Vaccine, 2013
Nonfebrile Seizures after Mumps, Measles, Rubella, and Varicella Zoster Virus Combination Vaccination with Detection of Measles Virus RNA in Serum, Throat, and Urine.Clinical and Vaccine Immuniology, 2013
Waning of Maternal Antibodies Against Measles, Mumps, Rubella, and Varicella in Communities With Contrasting Vaccination Coverage.Oxford Journals Medicine & Health The Journal of Infectious Diseases, 2013
Unexpectedly Limited Durability of Immunity Following Acellular Pertussis Vaccination in PreAdolescents in a North American Outbreak.Oxford Journals Medicine & Health Clinical Infectious Diseases, 2012
Comparison of the Safety, Vaccine Virus Shedding, and Immunogenicity of Influenza Virus Vaccine, Trivalent, Types A and B, Live ColdAdapted, Administered to Human Immunodeficiency Virus (HIV) Infected and NonHIVInfected. Adults Oxford Journals Medicine & Health The Journal of Infectious Diseases, 2000
Study: What is regressive autism and why does it occur? Is it the consequence of multi systemic dysfunction affecting the elimination of heavy metals and the ability to regulate neural temperature? North American Journal of Medical Science, 2009
In the latest interview [below] by VictoryIndependence, the founder of Council For Vaccine Safety, Brandy Vaughan, is interviewed on the dangers of vaccinations. As a recent whistleblower coming directly from the pharmaceutical industry, Vaughan was a former employee with Merck and is now warning people of the dangers that are implicit in vaccination.
Topics discussed are:
– Details of the history of the SB277 Bill that forces parents to vaccinate their children, thus netting Big Pharma untold amounts in profits.
-Her background as a whistleblower.
– Current and upcoming vaccine schedules in comparison to other countries.
– Amish people not vaccinating and not having nigh any issues compared to folks that do.
– The importance of plumbing, sewage, sanitation and clean water in health vs. vaccinations.
– Measles, mumps being normal 30 years ago and the fact that they don’t affect you like the media claims.
– 1986 the Pharmaceutical Industry was granted federal immunity from prosecution from vaccine reactions. Ask yourself why they would need to if vaccines are so safe?
– After 1986 vaccine profits skyrocketed and vaccine schedules increased largely as well.
– According to studies, Big Pharma can spend between 3x-10x more on marketing than research.
– Harvard students standing up against their professors getting paid by Big Pharma
– How 40-50% of all advertising media gets comes directly from Pharmaceutical Industry, thus making it nigh impossible for reporters to question the very hand that feeds them.
– How the US is only country in the world where people take their children to the Doctor when they are healthy.
– Heavy Metal toxicity issues
– Developmental delays and disabilities [ADHD, Autism, speech delays].
– Autism higher in males than females because testosterone binds to heavy metals
– Autoimmune disorders
– Neurological Issues
– Vaccines not classified as drugs, which makes their regulations way more lax, when the opposite should be the case. Bug vaccines are in fact drugs, they do have chemicals, and are being injected directly instead of ingested and they go straight to the vital organs.