New study: Vaccine Manufacturers and FDA Regulators Used Statistical Gimmicks to Hide Risks of HPV Vaccines

New study: Vaccine Manufacturers and FDA Regulators Used Statistical Gimmicks to Hide Risks of HPV Vaccines
Source: GreenMedInfo.com
Robert F. Kennedy Jr.
August 13, 2017

Originally published on worldmercuryproject.org.

A new study published in Clinical Rheumatology exposes how vaccine manufacturers used phony placebos in clinical trials to conceal a wide range of devastating risks associated with HPV vaccines.

Instead of using genuine inert placebos and comparing health impacts over a number of years, as is required for most new drug approvals, Merck and GlaxoSmithKline spiked their placebos with a neurotoxic aluminum adjuvant and cut observation periods to a matter of months.

Researchers from Mexico’s National Institute of Cardiology pored over 28 studies published through January 2017—16 randomized trials and 12 post-marketing case series—pertaining to the three human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccines currently on the market globally. In their July 2017 peer-reviewed report, the authors, Manuel Martínez-Lavin and Luis Amezcua-Guerra, uncovered evidence of numerous adverse events, including life-threatening injuries, permanent disabilities, hospitalizations and deaths, reported after vaccination with GlaxoSmithKline’s bivalent Cervarix vaccine and Merck’s quadrivalent or nine-valent HPV vaccines (Gardasil and Gardasil 9). Pharmaceutical company scientists routinely dismissed, minimized or concealed those injuries using statistical gimmicks and invalid comparisons designed to diminish their relative significance.

Of the 16 HPV vaccine randomized trials, only two used an inert saline placebo. Ten of the sixteen compared the HPV vaccine against a neurotoxic aluminum adjuvant, and four trials used an already-approved aluminum-containing vaccine as the comparison.

Scientific researchers view double-blind placebo trials as the gold standard for testing new drugs. To minimize bias, investigators randomly assign patients to either a “treatment” group or a “control” (placebo) group and then compare health outcomes. The standard practice is to compare a new drug against a “pharmacologically inert” placebo. To minimize opportunities for bias, neither patients nor researchers know which individuals received the drug and which the placebo. However, in clinical trials of the various HPV vaccines, pharmaceutical researchers avoided this kind of rigor and instead employed sleight-of-hand flimflams to mask the seriousness of vaccine injuries.

Of the 16 HPV vaccine randomized trials, only two used an inert saline placebo. Ten of the sixteen compared the HPV vaccine against a neurotoxic aluminum adjuvant, and four trials used an already-approved aluminum-containing vaccine as the comparison. One does not have to be a scientist to understand that using aluminum-containing placebos is likely to muddy the comparison between the treatment and control groups. Critics of the HPV vaccine have pointed to the aluminum adjuvant as the most likely cause of adverse reactions, and some researchers have questioned the safety of using aluminum adjuvants in vaccines at all, due to their probable role as a contributor to chronic illness. The aluminum-containing placebos appeared to provoke numerous adverse reactions among the presumably unwitting patients who received them, allowing the pharma researchers to mask the cascade of similar adverse reactions among the groups that received the vaccines. Although both placebo and study groups suffered numerous adverse events in these studies, there were minimal differences between the two groups. The similar adverse outcomes in both groups allowed industry researchers and government regulators to claim that the vaccines were perfectly safe, despite manifold disturbing reactions. The Mexican researchers’ meta-review confirms the difficulty of ascertaining vaccine-attributable differences from this mess; the researchers identified only a few indications of “significantly increased systemic adverse events in the HPV vaccine group vs. the control group” across the 16 pre-licensure trials.

The HPV promoters found it more difficult to employ deceptive devices in the 12 post-marketing safety reviews, and the Mexican authors summarize some of the more noteworthy findings. In Spain, they found a ten-fold higher incidence of vaccine-related adverse events following HPV vaccination compared to “other types of vaccines.” In Canada, they found an astonishing one in ten rate of hospital emergency department visits among HPV-vaccinated individuals “within 42 days after immunization.” Still, the industry researchers did what they could to minimize these injuries. The Mexican reviewers criticize the authors of the various post-marketing studies for failing to ask essential questions, to evaluate the many serious adverse events, or to elaborate on their often-troubling findings.

Abbreviated Trial Times

Typically, FDA requires drug companies seeking approval for a new drug to observe health outcomes in both the placebo and study groups for 4-5 years. Vaccine manufacturers take advantage of FDA regulatory loopholes that allow fast-tracking of vaccines and cut that period down to a few weeks or even a few days. This means that injuries that manifest, or are diagnosed, later in life—most neurodevelopmental disorders, for example—will escape attention entirely.

Further Smokescreens

Martínez-Lavin and Amezcua-Guerra point to clinical trial data posted on the FDA webpage for the quadrivalent Gardasil vaccine approved in 2006. Those clinical trials deployed a panoply of the kind of cunning deceptions used by industry and government researchers. Unlike many of the other HPV vaccine clinical trials, these clinical studies employed a true saline placebo.

Across the Gardasil clinical studies, a group of 15,706 females ages 9-45 and males ages 9-26 received the quadrivalent Gardasil vaccine. A control group of 594 individuals received an inert saline placebo. The industry researchers never explain the tiny relative size of the saline placebo group; it’s noteworthy that small size would have the effect of keeping unwanted signals weak. But a second control group of 13,023 received a so-called “spiked” placebo loaded with an aluminum adjuvant (amorphous aluminum hydroxyphosphate sulfate or AAHS). The large size of this “spiked placebo” group suggests that the decision to keep the saline placebo group small was strategic.

Putting aside the thorny ethical question of whether study participants were told that they were being injected with a neurotoxin with probable associations with Alzheimer’s, dementia and other forms of brain disease, the inclusion of both saline and aluminum placebos provided these researchers a chance to do some genuine science. But the FDA webpage shows the troubling gimmick that was then employed by the FDA and Merck, which seems deliberately designed to blur datasets in order to mask adverse effects during the clinical trials. The table showing relatively minor injection-site adverse reactions—one to five days post-vaccination—displays three distinct columns for the three groups: Gardasil recipients, the aluminum “placebo” recipients, and saline placebo recipients (see table below). In the table, “Intergroup differences are obvious,” in the words of the Mexican researchers. For example, roughly three and a half times more girls/women experienced injection site swelling in the Gardasil group compared to the saline group (25.4% vs. 7.3%). In fact, by all five measures, both the Gardasil recipients and the aluminum placebo recipients fared two to three times worse than the saline recipients.

New study: Vaccine Manufacturers and FDA Regulators Used Statistical Gimmicks to Hide Risks of HPV Vaccines

When it came time for Merck to report on the occurrence of more serious reactions, “Systemic Adverse Reactions” and “Systemic Autoimmune Disorders,” for example, the company scientists switched to a very different format. In these tables, the third column that reported results for the saline placebo recipients disappears. Instead, Merck combined the groups receiving the spiked aluminum placebo into a single column with the group receiving the genuine saline placebo (see example below). The merger of the two control groups makes it impossible to compare results for Gardasil versus the saline placebo or the aluminum placebo versus the saline placebo. In this way, Merck’s researchers obliterated any hope of creating a meaningful safety comparison.

New study: Vaccine Manufacturers and FDA Regulators Used Statistical Gimmicks to Hide Risks of HPV Vaccines

Risks and Benefits

Given aluminum’s known neurotoxicity and its association with debilitating autoimmune conditions, it is unsurprising that there are no observable differences between the Gardasil and AAHS/saline groups. But, despite the researchers’ efforts to paper over adverse effects, they were not able to conceal the devastating health injuries to their human guinea pigs. The bottom line of these trials reveals a shocking truth: An alarming 2.3% of both their study and control groups had indicators of autoimmune diseases! These data are even more alarming when one considers that the observation period was curtailed after only six months. With this level of risk, it would seem that no loving parents would allow their daughter to receive this vaccine—particularly given the comparatively low risk posed by HPV in countries with appropriate cervical cancer screening tests. Even in countries such as India, where cervical cancer mortality is high due to late detection, leading Indian physicians argue that comprehensive screening should be the country’s top priority rather than the “panacea” of HPV vaccination.

Consider the math: According to the National Institutes of Health (NIH), an estimated 2.4 women per 100,000 die of cervical cancer in the US each year. On the other hand, the FDA’s Table 2 (above) shows that 2.3 per 100girls and women developed an “incident condition potentially indicative of a systemic autoimmune disorder” after enrolling in the Gardasil clinical trial. It is difficult to understand how any rational regulator could allow more than two in 100 girls to run the risk of acquiring a lifelong autoimmune disorder, particularly when Pap smears are already doing an effective job of identifying cervical abnormalities. The NIH notes that the incidence and death rates for cervical cancer in the US declined by more than 60% after introducing Pap smear screening.

Based on the numerical outcomes of that study, the Mexican researchers calculated the likelihood of being actually “helped or harmed by the 9-valent HPV vaccine.” Their “worrisome” finding is that the “number needed to harm” is just 140, whereas 1757 women would need to receive the vaccine for a single one of them to enjoy its projected benefits.

Martínez-Lavin and Amezcua-Guerra make their own effort to illustrate the zany risk-benefit ratios associated with these vaccines when discussing the results of one of the 16 clinical trials. That study compared approximately 14,000 women who received either Gardasil 9 or the original quadrivalent Gardasil. Based on the numerical outcomes of that study, the Mexican researchers calculated the likelihood of being actually “helped or harmed by the 9-valent HPV vaccine.” Their “worrisome” finding is that the “number needed to harm” is just 140, whereas 1757 women would need to receive the vaccine for a single one of them to enjoy its projected benefits.

Implications for Aluminum Adjuvants

Merck found that astronomical casualty counts were equal among both Gardasil and aluminum “placebo” recipients. The inescapable implication is that aluminum adjuvants may be a principal culprit in the flood of injuries reported for the various HPV vaccines. This conclusion, if true, requires reevaluation of the use of aluminum adjuvants in several other vaccines, including some given to infants. Aluminum adjuvant levels have mushroomed since the 2003 removal of thimerosal from three pediatric vaccines. The following chart, prepared by Dr. Sherri Tenpenny, illustrates the stunning amount of aluminum in vaccines.

New study: Vaccine Manufacturers and FDA Regulators Used Statistical Gimmicks to Hide Risks of HPV Vaccines

Multiple peer-reviewed studies have connected aluminum exposures to a range of autoimmune and neurological disorders, including dementia and Alzheimer’s disease, that have become epidemic coterminous with these aluminum exposures. A review in the European Journal of Clinical Nutritionwarns of dangerous accumulation of aluminum in the brain when, as in the case of vaccination, “protective gastrointestinal mechanisms are bypassed.” It’s time to go back to the drawing board on HPV vaccines and aluminum adjuvants. More importantly, FDA needs to start requiring the same rigorous pre-licensing safety testing for vaccines that it has long required for other drugs. All existing vaccines, particularly those containing aluminum, should be safety-reviewed according to these more stringent standards.

Learn more from RFK, Jr., and 30 other experts at the free screening of the Truth About Vaccines.

Read More At: GreenMedInfo.com

Advertisements

Obama’s Former Doctor Says Hillary Should Have A Neurological Exam

Screen Shot 2016-08-31 at 9.59.00 AM
Source: LibertyBlitzkrieg.com
Michael Krieger
September 2, 2016

I don’t possess any more insight than you do regarding the medical condition of Hillary Clinton. However, what I do know is that given her age and health history asking questions is definitely not conspiracy theory. While hordes of pundits with no medical training claim otherwise, an increasing number of high profile doctors seem to agree with my obvious conclusion. As I highlighted in last week’s post, Questioning Hillary’s Health is Not Conspiracy Theory:

Lately many in the media have become outraged that Clinton’s health is being broached at all. And what are the primary two words associated when Donald Trump, a Trump surrogate or conservative media bring up Clinton’s medical condition?

“Conspiracy theories.” 

But are they all just engaging in wacky speculation in an effort to take down Clinton, where she has a relatively comfortable 5.5-point lead in the RealClearPolitics average of polls?

At first, Clinton health speculation was something you could read about on Drudge or Brietbart or hear about on “Hannity” on Fox News. But recently, other medical voices have come forward to bring the narrative to a non-partisan, legitimate level.

A prime example comes in the form from Beth Israel Medical Center’s Dr. Bob Lahita, who is not a fringe medical expert or one who engages in political advocacy. Dr. Lahita’s resume is impressive: Currently chairman of the department of medicine at Newark Beth Israel Medical Center. His opinion is so respected, he’s been tapped as a medical expert by “CBS This Morning,” MSNBC, ABC’s “Good Morning America,” Fox Business Network and “Health on 12” in New Jersey.

“This is a very unusual story with Hillary,” said Lahita, pointing to the two blood clots she’s been diagnosed with in the past. “The very fact that she’s having these clots and she’s had two bouts of thrombosis is disconcerting to say the least.”

When asked if questions about Clinton’s health are legitimate and not part of a political conspiracy, Lahita said without hesitation, “I don’t think it’s a conspiracy.”

Further proving the point that Hillary health questions are not conspiracy theory, Obama’s former physician, Dr. David Scheiner, just suggested Hillary Clinton get a neurological examination. From The Hill:

President Obama’s former physician said that he believes Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton should have a neurological examination due to her history of brain injury.

During an interview on CNN, Dr. David Scheiner argued that Clinton’s note from her doctor isn’t enough. The letter details that Clinton had follow-up testing in 2013 that showed a full recovery from a concussion and that she tested negative for clotting disorders.

“I think she should have had a neurological examination, a thorough neurological examination in 2016,” Scheiner said Tuesday night. “We know what happens to football players who have had concussions, how they begin to lose some of their cognitive ability. I think both of them should release their records.”

Read More At: LibertyBlitzkrieg.com

Mumps outbreak in Long Island likely caused by vaccine-resistant virus; majority of those affected were immunized

Mumps outbreak

Source: NaturalNews.com
Isabelle Z.
August 6, 2016

Long Beach has been hit with a mumps outbreak that is vaccine-resistant. According to health officials in the Long Island town, almost two dozen individuals are believed to have contracted the virus, with four confirmed cases and at least 14 suspected ones.

All of the cases involve people in their 20s, and the outbreak is being attributed to a new vaccine-resistant strain of the virus. In fact, most of those who have contracted mumps in this case have been vaccinated against it. Despite this, officials are actually urging people who have been in contact with those who are infected to get a mumps booster shot! If this strain of the virus is vaccine-resistant, and those who have been vaccinated are getting it anyway, why should people get yet another vaccine?

It’s also worth noting that none of the people currently affected are seriously ill. The symptoms of mumps tend to be mild, and include swollen cheeks, a headache, body aches and low-grade fever. There is no treatment, and it usually clears up on its own in just a few days.

Mumps is, however, highly contagious. It can be transmitted through the transfer of saliva, sneezing or coughing. As beach season continues in full swing, some Long Beach restaurants are even supplying diners with plastic cups as a means of stemming the outbreak. People who have symptoms of the illness are being advised to stay home for five days to avoid spreading it.

Controversy over mumps component of MMR vaccine

As some Natural News readers may recall, two Merck scientists filed a False Claims Act complaint back in 2010 saying that the Big Pharma firm knowingly falsified mumps vaccine data in order to come up with an efficacy rate of 95 percent. They achieved this by spiking the blood test involved with antibodies taken from animals.

This not only allowed them to earn hundreds of millions of dollars from the U.S. government, but also helped them crush the competition and monopolize the vaccine market.

The complainants said that Merck never tested the vaccine against actual mumps viruses out in the real world, and alleged that senior management was aware of this and allowed it to happen. That’s why it’s so important to seek out studies that are free from industry collusion.

Mumps outbreaks becoming fairly common among the vaccinated

Mumps outbreaks seem to be occurring a lot lately. Earlier this year, for example, the illness broke out at Harvard and a handful of other Boston colleges. More than three quarters of those afflicted had been vaccinated.

Dozens of university students in Illinois came down with mumps last year, despite the majority of them having previously been administered two rounds of the MMR vaccine. Do you spot a trend here?

It’s important to note that not only does the MMR vaccine not actually prevent mumps, but it might actually be responsible for spreading it. That’s because the injection contains a weakened version of the live virus, which causes an infection in the body. It can then be “shed” to other people, such as those who have not been vaccinated, or those who have compromised immune systems. That’s why it makes absolutely no sense that authorities are urging people who have been exposed to get yet another vaccine.

Of course, there are other reasons people might want to avoid the vaccine besides the fact that it doesn’t protect against mumps. The MMR vaccine has been linked to a number of harmful effects, including neurological damage, autism, developmental delays, seizure disorders, asthma and autoimmune dysfunction, to name just a few.

Read More At: NaturalNews.com

Sources include:

NBCNewYork.com

NaturalNews.com

NewYork.CBSLocal.com

NaturalNews.com

NaturalNews.com

Science.NaturalNews.com

Ohio Legislature moves towards mandatory vaccines, proposing to eliminate philosophical exemptions entirely

Mandatory vaccines

Source: NaturalNews.com
L.J. Devon
July 22, 2016

A growing number of parents across the nation are now going against the recommendations of the CDC vaccine schedule – which currently promotes the injecting of 49 doses of various vaccines before a child turns 6 years old. The number of parents opting out of the onslaught of childhood vaccinations has doubled since 2009. As vaccine use plummets, state legislatures are trying to find new ways to bully parents into the vaccination cycle.

A new bill in Ohio (HB 564) seeks to intimidate parents into vaccine compliance by forcing them to be re-educated about the benefits of vaccines. Ohio parents will no longer be allowed to send their children to public schools unless they see a state-licensed medical doctor first to receive such re-education. If the parent objects to a vaccine, and determines it’s not worth the risk to their child, they will no longer get to make that choice freely. This law will put parents under the control of the medical system by denying any philosophical exemption the parent may have.

Since vaccines are a medical procedure, informed consent should always be required. However, if this law were to pass, the government could make extremely risky medical decisions without parental consent. HB 564 allows school administrators to vaccinate children without parental consent, if officials deem it necessary.

The state is claiming ownership of children’s bodies, trampling on the natural rights and convictions of parents

If Ohio parents object to a vaccine, they will be required by law to report to and get permission from a state-licensed medical doctor. The doctor is then required by the state to bully the parents with pro-pharmaceutical propaganda that makes vaccines look like perfect medical science. If the parents still object to the vaccine after the doctor has tried to forcibly brainwash them, they can then try to obtain a “religious exemption.” At this stage, many parents will just go along to get along because it’s easier to comply than argue with a doctor or be investigated, harassed, and/or profiled.

Under the pressure of this new medical system dictate, it will be easier for parents to just let go of their natural born rights and throw away their own education, experiences and convictions on vaccines. If parents continue to object, doctors will easily feel threatened and may attempt to call in the CPS to kidnap the child and put them into state custody. This is a growing problem around the country.

At the end of day, parents won’t be able to obtain a “religious exemption” to the vaccines unless the medical doctor and the state give them permission. In this way, parents are being turned into slaves of the state, and essentially slaves of the pharmaceutical companies which ultimately control the science, the law and the minds of medical professionals.

Most disturbingly, the state is essentially claiming ownership over children’s bodies. If parents want to use the public school education system (most parents have no choice), they must sign their sovereign, parental rights away to the state, subjecting their children to being pincushions for endless vaccine and pharmaceutical experiments.

Parents don’t need permission to raise healthy and independent children

Why should parents be forced to vaccinate their children endlessly for benign illnesses that the body can build natural, lifelong immunity to?

Why should parents be forced to retrain their child’s entire immune system (weakening natural first line defenses) with ongoing shots?

Why should parents fear diseases that have statistically been overcome in communities with proper hygiene, sanitation and nutrition?

How many micrograms of aluminum are in those 49 vaccine doses, and how do they affect children’s neurological development?

These questions (and many more concerns of parents) will not be answered, or in fact entertained at all in Ohio, because the medical system may soon have the authority of the law to ram pro-vaccine propaganda down parents’ throats, intimidating them into vaccine compliance, barring their children from public school attendance, or vaccinating them against a parent’s will.

Vaccines (singularly or in compounding doses) can damage children subtly or dramatically for life. More people are recognizing this and saying NO. No parent needs permission or an exemption to make a medical decision for their own body or for the bodies of their children.

Read More At: NaturalNews.com

Antidepressants Linked To Neurological Damage In Newborns, Study Finds

[Editor’s Note]

There are numerous noxious effects from psych drugs.  This is a problem plaguing tens of millions of Americans [estimated 30 million or so] and is not as reported as it should be.  For more information regarding this the countless issues with antidepressants please read:

A Mind Of Your Own: The Truth About Depression & How Women Can Reclaim Their Lives by Dr. Kelly Brogan
Toxic Psychiatry – Dr. Peter R. Breggin

Antidepressants
Source: NaturalNews.com
Amy Goodrich
July 15, 2016

Although pregnancy is viewed by most as a time to joyously anticipate the welcoming of a new life into the world, a rising number of new moms or moms-to-be struggle with symptoms of depression and anxiety.

Depression during pregnancy is not to be taken lightly. It is a severe medical condition that poses a significant risk for mother and baby. Currently, medical guidelines suggest non-pharmacological interventions, such as psychotherapy, as a first-line treatment. However, oftentimes patients are prescribed antidepressants instead.

Multiple studies have linked antidepressant use during pregnancy to a number of side-effects, including an increased risk of preterm birth, low birth weight, infant convulsions, autism, cardiovascular defects, excessive brain fluid at birth, smaller head size, and other congenital and developmental defects, as noted by Mad In America.

SRI antidepressants change electrical activity in the brain

It is estimated that somewhere between 6 and 15 percent of all women use an antidepressant during their pregnancy, with serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SRIs) being the most commonly prescribed.

While these drugs are considered safe to use during pregnancy by the medical world, scientific papers are showing an entirely different story.

A new, groundbreaking study from researchers associated with the BABA center at the University of Helsinki’s Children’s Hospital in Finland, has for the first time in history recorded the effects of SRI exposure on the electrical activity of newborns’ brains.

The study, published in the journal Cerebral Cortex, involved 22 mothers using SRI drugs and 62 controls without medication, and found a link between fetal SRI drug exposure and less organized communication between the baby’s brain hemispheres, as well as weaker synchronization between cortical rhythms.

What’s more, the negative effects seem to outlast the known withdrawal period that is commonly seen in newborns exposed to SRIs in the womb.

“We found many changes in the brain activity of SRI-exposed newborns,” says Professor Sampsa Vanhatalo, head of the BABA center at the Helsinki University Children’s Hospital. “Since the changes did not correlate with the mother’s psychiatric symptoms, we have assumed that they resulted as a side effect of maternal drug treatment.”

“This is the first study to show that prenatal SRI exposure in humans can affect the newborn cortical function beyond the acute withdrawal period,” the team concludes. “Our detailed quantitative, computational EEG analyses indicated SRI-related effects in both focal and global brain activity.”

Need for effective alternative treatments

Despite the current guidelines that recommend non-pharmacological therapies, and the living proof of the dangerous effects of antidepressants on a child’s developing brain, antidepressants are still the preferred treatment. And not only for pregnant women.

According to the IMS Health Vector One National database, more than two million developing U.S. children aged between 0 and 17 were prescribed antidepressants in 2013. Of these children, 26,406 were less than a year old.

“The current guidelines do include non-pharmacological therapies as the first-line treatment,” said Outi Mantere from McGill University, Canada. “If the mother using an SRI plans a pregnancy, it would be advisable to consider a close follow-up or a therapeutic intervention without SRI medication. Recent experience with group therapy has shown promise in treating depression or anxiety during pregnancy, with effects that extend to the wellbeing of both mother and baby.”

“We hope that our study will facilitate the current international discussion and search for effective alternatives in the treatment of depression and anxiety during pregnancy,” adds Professor Vanhatalo, as reported by EurekAlert.

Given the proof of developmental defects, as well as the self-harm and violent side effects associated with antidepressant use both during pregnancy and later in the child’s life, one may ask why these drugs are still prescribed to pregnant women and children alike.

“The question, of course, is no longer whether antidepressants are harmful but, rather, how much more damning research will be necessary before regulators take action to remove them from the market,” said Kelly Patricia O’Meara, writing for the CCHR International.

Read More At: NaturalNews.com

The Vaccine In Vaxxed: So Pure, Angels Sent It For Your Kiddies

QuestionEverything2
Source: NoMoreFakeNews.com
Jon Rappoport
March 29, 2016

(To read about Jon’s mega-collection, The Matrix Revealed, click here.)

Whatever happens in a doctor’s office must be good, right?

Don’t worry, be happy, angels brought the MMR vaccine to Earth so doctors could shoot your kiddies with it.

The film, Vaxxed, which has been axed from the Tribeca Film Festival, is all about the MMR (measles, mumps, rubella) vaccine.

Long-time CDC researcher, Bill Thompson, publicly admitted he and his colleagues committed gross fraud, to make the vaccine seem safe, to pretend it had no connection to autism, when it did. They lied. That’s what Vaxxed is about.

So pardon me, but I thought I’d offer some quotes about MMR. Just to keep you in the loop.

“In 1977, 34 new cases of measles were reported on the campus of UCLA, in a population that was supposedly 91% immune, according to careful serological testing. Another 20 cases of measles were reported in the Pecos, New Mexico, area within a period of a few months in 1981, and 75% of them had been fully immunized, some of them quite recently. A survey of sixth-graders in a well-immunized urban community revealed that about 15% of this age group are still susceptible to rubella, a figure essentially identical with that of the pre-vaccine era.” Richard Moskowitz, MD, The Case Against Immunizations, 1983, American Institute of Homeopathy.

At the excellent site, thinktwice.com, long-time vaccine investigator and author, Neil Z Miller, has assembled an impressive cache of information about the MMR vaccine. Here are a few highlights:

“The drug company that makes the MMR vaccine publishes an extensive list of warnings, contraindications, and adverse reactions associated with this triple shot. These may be found in the vaccine package insert available from any doctor giving MMR, and in the Physician’s Desk Reference (PDR) at the library. The following afflictions affecting nearly every body system — blood, lymphatic, digestive, cardiovascular, immune, nervous, respiratory, and sensory — have been reported following receipt of the MMR shot: encephalitis, encephalopathy, neurological disorders, seizure disorders, convulsions, learning disabilities, subacute sclerosing panencephalitis (SSPE), demyelination of the nerve sheaths, Guillain-Barre’ syndrome (paralysis), muscle incoordination, deafness, panniculitis, vasculitis, optic neuritis (including partial or total blindness), retinitis, otitis media, bronchial spasms, fever, headache, joint pain, arthritis (acute and chronic), transverse myelitis, thrombocytopenia (blood clotting disorders and spontaneous bleeding), anaphylaxis (severe allergic reactions), lymphadenopathy, leukocytosis, pneumonitis, Stevens-Johnson syndrome, erythema multiforme, urticaria, pancreatitis, parotitis, inflammatory bowel disease, Crohn’s disease, ulcerative colitis, meningitis, diabetes, autism, immune system disorders, and death.”  [Bold Emphasis Added]

More from Neil Miller: “This section contains unsolicited adverse reaction reports associated with the MMR vaccine. They are typical of the daily emails received by the ThinkTwice Global Vaccine Institute:

[MMR114] My 12-month-old received his MMR shot on a Friday. The following Friday he had a 104 degree temperature and became violently ill. The doctor said it was a stomach virus. But on Monday morning he woke up with a rash all over. I took him to the doctor and was very upset to learn that this is very common.

[MMR128] Recently, my 13-month-old had his MMR. He now has constant high fevers and seizures, which he never had. He is a totally different boy. This is devastating.

[MMR176] My friend’s 15-month-old daughter received an MMR vaccine. Within eight days she was hospitalized with a 104 degree fever and a skin rash. My friend called to see what I could find out about Stevens-Johnson syndrome. They told her that her daughter may die as a result of this.

Continue Reading At: JonRappoport.com

 

Vaccines Don’t Address Root Cause of Problem

Source: IHealthTube

Dr. Bob DeMaria discusses vaccines and their effectiveness. He also talks about why he says vaccines don’t get to the root cause of the problem. Fine out what he thinks about the possible connection between vaccines and brain and other neurological issues. He also gives tips on what you should do before getting your child vaccinated if you choose to go down that road.