From Hell To Veins

December 3, 2013

If HPV vaccines were consumer goods would they still be on the market?

Now, I wrote this very same article and asked the very same question back in 2009.

This is a great article that not only exposes the mental illness in our society,  that is, to be conned into injecting lethal garbage into our young girls NOW `boy’s veins but, it also clearly demonstrates that we live in a society where the welfare and common good of the PEOPLE are trumped by corporate interests.

This article is a textbook definition of a fascist society.

——————————————————-

If HPV vaccines were consumer goods would they still be on the market?
http://www.naturalblaze.com/2013/12/if-hpv-vaccines-were-consumer-goods.html#sthash.J6Uljy27.dpuf
by Stephen TunleyThe latest statistics from the USA’s Vaccine Adverse Events Reporting System (VAERS) statistics concerning the serious side effects and deaths associated with HPV vaccines such as Gardasil make for chilling reading.

In summary a single investigation of the VAERS database, widely accepted as being 10-100 times under reported about, shows the following

  1. 148 deaths recorded after HPV vaccinations,
  2. Over 3,000 hospitalizations and
  3. More than 6,000 who did not recover from the new medical conditions experienced after HPV vaccines.

The picture is not pretty and were you to add a zero or two to these numbers to account for under-reporting, the picture is frightening indeed. It’s important to note that the statistics are for events occurring primarily in the USA; not taking into account other countries, which have faced very similar health issues.

In the case of Gardasil for some reason the same safety issues that govern say; automobiles, baby equipment, tires, peanut butter and more do not apply. Vaccines appear to be subject to very different standards, standards where it is quite acceptable to have deaths, life threatening and life changing illness associated with your product. Standards where reports made to anyone from the manufacturer, to the regulator(s), to the so-called experts result in scant investigations by those who have worryingly close ties to the industry which they are supposed to be investigating.

To put this in perspective, imagine if Gardasil were a car associated with the same level of deaths (to date over 148) and tens of thousands of serious adverse events; would the car still be on the road? I do not think so.Consider Toyota in January 21, 2010 recalled 4.1 million vehicles sold in the U.S. and Europe to fix faulty accelerator (gas) pedals which had a tendency to get stuck, causing unintended acceleration. In November the previous year 5.3 million cars were recalled as they believed that ill-fitting floor mats-had a tendency to trap pedals. In total, Toyota has recalled more than 9 million cars worldwide for pedal-related flaws. That’s nearly the same as the total number of all vehicles sold in the U.S. in 2009. The House Oversight and Government Reform Committee announced plans to investigate

whether the Japanese-based automaker had needlessly put the public at risk.What committee is reviewing the considerable health issues that surround HPV vaccines? To date, the answer is none.

If Gardasil were a baby sling, it would have been pulled from the market after just 3 deaths as was the case with the Infantino baby sling – one million were recalled in March, 2010.

More than 400,000 drop-side cribs made by Simplicity in the USA were recalled in July 2009 after an 8-month-old child in Houston suffocated.Yet many tens of thousands of serious adverse reactions and over 148 deaths temporally associated with Gardasil do not appear to issue a single raised eyebrow amongst those charged with overseeing safety, by this I mean in the USA the FDA, in Europe the EMA, and the TGA in Australia!

In 1982 Tylenol recalled 31 million bottles of the product after 7 Deaths. I resisted putting ‘just’ before 7 but it sure puts the issues to do with Gardasil into perspective!

So why is Gardasil treated differently? The fact is it should not be. It’s a product just like Tylenol or Toyota. Consumers pay for it (directly or via tax imposts) and it should be governed by the same rules as any other product i.e. it should be a product fit for use and if it’s not then it should be recalled immediately.

I cannot imagine any person of sound mind going ahead and purchasing a baby sling from Infantino if they knew it had caused, or could cause, a single death, yet they will merrily march their daughters, and now sons, to the local medical center and have them vaccinated with a vaccine that has demonstrated considerable and very serious health issues associated with it?But it gets worse. Gardasil has not only far too many deaths and serious health issues associated with it, there is no proof that it works!

Lack of proven efficacy:

  • HPV vaccines have not been proven to prevent even one case of cervical cancer.
  • HPV infections are only one of several risk factors contributing to the development of cervical cancer.
  • When detected, HPV infections are easily managed and rarely proceed to cervical cancer.
  • At least 50% of sexually active men and women are exposed to HPV at some point in their lives.
  • 90% of these infections clear on their own within two years without incident.
  • Those exposed to vaccine relevant HPV types may experience an increased risk of precancerous lesions if vaccinated.
  • HPV vaccines would have to be effective for at least 15 years to prove effective at preventing cervical cancer.
  • Yet, HPV vaccine efficacy begins to wane at 5 years!
  • Symptoms experienced after HPV vaccinations are lasting longer than 5 years in some girls.
  • Pap screening has already been proven to be a safe and effective means of controlling cervical cancer. It’s also very inexpensive and causes no significant health issues. No one has died from a PAP smear.
  • 11% of the population has been exposed to HPV regardless of sexual status according to Dr Diane Harper a researcher who was involved in the safety and efficacy trials for the Human Papillomavirus (HPV) vaccine – Gardasil, in a paper published in the Journal of Vaccines & Vaccination that “We do not know how long the vaccine will last, the HPV types covered by the vaccine are limited, and the very safe alternative of PAP screening with early detection and treatment is a proven successful program. Gardasil is not likely to extend a woman’s life in countries with cytology (PAP) screening…”

Potential Safety Issues:

  • In the September 2008 FDA closing statement on Gardasil it was noted that 73.3% of girls in the clinical trials developed “new medical conditions” post vaccination. 17 girls died on the clinical trials. (No inert placebo was used during the vast majority of clinical trials, which means the vaccines were proven no more dangerous than the active ingredients in the control solution.)
  • Recombinant HPV DNA L1 gene DNA fragments possibly attached to the aluminum adjuvant, were discovered in 100% of samples tested Gardasil in 2011. To date there has been no serious investigation as to potential health impacts. The FDA simply declared the ‘expected’ presence of residual DNA is not a safety factor. No documentation was provided in support of this. The fact HPV vaccines were approved by Governments worldwide based on manufacturers’ assertions that the vaccines contained ‘no viral DNA’ was ignored completely [5] , [6] The possibility of recombinant HPV DNA fragments being attached to aluminum adjuvant particles was also ignored.
  • One of the antigens used in Gardasil was discovered in the central nervous system samples from two girls who died after being vaccinated with Gardasil. No cause of death was identified upon autopsy in either case. [7]
  • HPV-16 L1 gene DNA fragments of vaccine origin apparently attached to aluminum adjuvant particles were discovered in postmortem blood and spleen samples of a girl who died 6 months Gardasil Effective injections. [8] , [9]
  • It was discovered that the naked HPV 16 L1 gene fragments bound to aluminum particles by ligand exchange in Gardasil-have acquired a non-B conformation. This conformational change may have stabilized the HPV 16 gene fragments in Gardasil preventing their normal enzymatic degradation in vaccine recipients.[10] , [11] Non-B DNA conformations and their relationship to diseases has been studied since the 1960′s. Based on current scientific knowledge, the human genetic consequences of these non-B DNA structures are approximately 20 neurological diseases, Approximately 50 genomic disorders and several psychiatric diseases.[12] , [13] The impact of injected foreign non-B DNA on human health is totally unknown.

Note – the above was taken from this article – http://sanevax.org/hpv-vaccines-betrayal-of-the-public-trust/

In recent years there has-been a tremendous and as yet uninvestigated rise in Chlamydia, which is a sexually transmitted infection (STI) that can affect women and men, following the introduction of HPV vaccines. If left untreated, chlamydia can causes pelvic inflammatory disease (PID) in women, all of which can lead to chronic pain and infertility. Chlamydia may have no symptoms, but can easily be treated with antibiotics. (See the charts below for information from the United States following the introduction of HPV vaccines in late 2006, early 2007.)

Chlamydia-Prevalence-01
Chlamydia-Prevalence-02
Chlamydia-Prevakence-03

Now for the good news, the manufacturer of Gardasil, Merck have sold hundreds of millions of vials of Gardasil resulting in billions of dollars of revenue from the product worldwide and now are working on a vaccine for…. Yep – you guessed it – Chlamydia!

So the company that is plausibly linked to a product that has (for some reason as yet unknown) has led to a rise in pretty serious STD, will at some stage launch a vaccine to fight it. Now that’s an integrated marketing strategy if ever I saw one.

But wait there’s more … sadly a lot more.

In the USA the regulator that oversees products like Gardasil – the FDA -is largely funded by virtue of the fees it charges Pharma and others to approve the product it regulates. This is the same position in Australia, where the TGA is along similar lines Funded.

In the USA the senior agency to the FDA is the NIH All which is in fact a share holder in the patent behind Gardasil and benefits from its success via the receipt of increasing patent income.

One more thing and it’s a big one. If your baby or automobile product is defective and proved it led to a single death, the manufacturer can be taken to court, sued and if the case proven, liable for considerable damages.

This is not the case with vaccines where the ability to sue the manufacturer was removed by the creation of the Vaccine Injury Compensation Program in 1988. This leaves those damaged by vaccines to apply for compensation under VICP, which is funded by a tax on each vaccine administered.

Now, the powers that be add insult to injury. If the injury experienced after a vaccine is not listed on the very limited table of injuries and occur within the time frame listed, it is up to the consumer to find experts who can prove their injury was caused or exacerbated by the vaccine. When it comes to HPV vaccines, the consumer is on their own because there are NO injuries listed on the VICP injury table – these vaccines are too new to have established a track record for damages.

Contrast this to a normal court case where it would be up to the manufacturer to prove their product did NOT cause the damage.

Sadly, the same is true in many other countries where the ability to sue a vaccine manufacturer is limited, or has been removed by statute.

HOWEVER, there is one country where government health officials appear to actually be concerned about what happens to their citizens after vaccinations. Interestingly, Japan has recently stopped recommending the continued use of HPV vaccines until a safety investigation has been completed.

So there you have it. One set of rules for vaccine manufacturers and a completely different set of rules for everyone else.

It’s time for this farce to stop. There is absolutely no basis that supports Gardasil is a product fit for use. It does not do what it purports to do, damages far too many that receive it, leads to some pretty horrible health effects and consequences . Yet the manufacturer stands above being sued by virtue of legislation.

This product must be recalled and recalled now. A truly independent review of what happened and why needs to be conducted with the ability to amend / repeal legislation, overhaul the regulators, and ensure the disclosure of conflicts that exist between the manufacturer so called independent experts and the regulators.

In the meantime, as a parent wake up, do the research before you vaccinate – or your child could be one more ignored VAERS statistic – is that the future you want for them?

Stephen Tunley is the director of SaneVax, Inc. where this first appeared

Advertisements

May 14, 2012

Mom’s Who Vaccinate (a rebuttal)

From Darlene’s Musings

Mom’s who vaccinate
While I am very, very sorry for this woman’s loss of her child, words cannot even begin to properly express how very, very insulted and angered I was by this article. The article is full of incorrect information and complete, utter garbage. The author of the article continually displays throughout the article a complete lack of knowledge of vaccines, illness and disease.

You can read the full article here;
http://shotofprevention.com/2011/04/29/moms-who-vaccinate-and-those-who-wish-they-had/

“… we must actively promote vaccines…most parents do not fear the actual diseases.” That is false. Most parents that are educated about vaccines, and who choose not to vaccinate, are concerned about the possibility of their child catching any serious illness or disease, but are fully aware of how imperative and beneficial a strong, healthy immune system is.

“…people don’t… realize that children can still contract these diseases.” Yes, children can in fact catch many diseases, and most non-vaccinating parents are very well aware of that. However, if the author of this article had actually read a little and actually researched what the hell she was talking about, she would have discovered that the majority of children that are contracting these “vaccine preventable diseases and illnesses” are the very same children who are receiving vaccines.

“…fear is … what motivates people to refuse vaccines. Fear of what most parents…don’t understand; the ingredients and the side-effects.” The majority of parents that choose not to vaccinate are parents that have thoroughly educated themselves about vaccines and the very real medical concerns and risks associated with vaccines. Non-vaccinating parents do not act in fear, but in knowledge, sound medical knowledge. It is typically vaccinating parents that act out of fear. They will vaccinate their child simply because “the doctor advised it”. Parents that choose to vaccinate are led to believe that “good, responsible parents vaccinate”, and are lied to and convinced that “vaccines will keep their child healthy”. Has the author of this article even bothered to read any vaccine inserts to see for herself exactly what very severe, debilitating neurotoxins are in these “safe” vaccines? In all likelihood, my guess is that no she did not.

She states in her article, “While some may believe fear to be an effective motivator, it is not the only way to generate a response.” No? Is her article not placing fear into parent’s minds? The fear of losing their child because the child is not vaccinated? That’s exactly what it does. The entire article presents the false belief that “vaccines save lives”, that “responsible” parents vaccinate, and that “choosing not to vaccinate your child puts them at risk of catching and dying from vaccine preventable disease”. The article is then accompanied by a very, very short clip of a grieving mother talking about losing her daughter, and a woman with a stethoscope around her neck….a doctor? Saying that you should vaccinate your child. There is no discussion or any mention of any type of medical statistics or anything to back up what they’re telling you. Yet in all reality, the likelihood of any child actually catching the illness this woman’s child caught and dying from it is statistically very, very low. It is however statistically much higher, and more likely that a child that does receive the vaccine can develop a very severe vaccine reaction, including the possibly of it resulting in death.

The author however did state, “… let me acknowledge the fact that…because someone is not vaccinated doesn’t…ensure that they will contract a vaccine preventable disease. Hardly the case.” EXACTLY! I notice that she does not state anywhere in her article the very real fact that vaccinating your child does not mean that they will be completely immune and not catch the disease or illness that they are being vaccinated for. She also makes no mention that most, if not all of the current outbreaks of illness and disease are occurring only amongst the vaccinated.

As for the author’s very ignorant comment, “The majority of unvaccinated people are fortunate enough, (due…to the herd immunity that is provided them by the rest of the vaccinated population), is complete lack of any knowledge on her part. Did the writer of this article even bother to research anything prior to writing her article? If she did, then she would have learned that the herd immunity theory was, in fact, about natural disease processes and had NOTHING to do with vaccination whatsoever! It was a theory that was introduced by a researcher named Hedrich, long before vaccinations even existed!

It was many years later that developers of vaccines adopted the phrase, and with no scientific justification as to why, stated that there had to be 95% vaccine coverage to achieve immunity. So, essentially, they took Hedrich’s study and manipulated it to promote their vaccination programs. (Monthly Estimates of the Child Population “Susceptible” to Measles 1900-1931, Baltimore, MD, AW Hedrich, American Journal of Epidemiology, May 1933-Oxford University Press.)

I find it so utterly ironic that parents will panic at the mere mention of any toy or item that may contain lead, even if the chance is very, very slim or even highly unlikely that their child will even develop any reaction or toxicity to the lead in that item or toy. Manufacturers and toy companies will always err on the side of caution as well, and recall any toy or item that may contain lead, for fear of the slightest possibility that a child could be harmed, and possibly develop lead poisoning.

Now, what exactly are the symptoms of lead poisoning? It depends on the child. A child could have a very high blood level of lead and yet may not exhibit any symptoms at all, or the exposure to the lead could result in any or all of the many symptoms of lead poisoning, including abdominal pain, constipation, and loss of appetite, agitation, lethargy, and even seizures.

You could easily argue as many people who advocate for vaccines do and say, “Well, what are the ‘safe’ levels of lead?” Since many pro-vaxxers will argue that vaccines and the toxins they contain are within “allowable”, “safe” limits. Yet every child is different, and what is a non-toxic level in one child, could be a level that is deadly toxic in another.

Okay, well to use that stupid argument, rather than throw any item away that may contain lead, simply have your child’s blood levels checked for lead, and not worry as long as your child’s blood levels of lead remain low, and the child does not demonstrate any symptoms of having lead poisoning. But no parent would ever do that and take that risk with their child’s health. And in all reality, there really is no defined level of lead which is said to be safe. And that is true for most, if not all of the additives/ingredients in vaccines.

However, erring on the side of caution, most, if not all parents will feel keeping an item or toy containing lead, no matter how small the exposure, is not worth the real possible health threat it could pose to their child, and will throw the item away. Yet, will not have this same rule of thought when it comes to injecting their child with vaccines that contain very real toxins and poisons, that primarily attack the brain and nervous system and can wreak far worse havoc than any exposure to lead ever could. And no one, not even your child’s doctor will know at what level these toxins in the vaccines will be lethal to your child, since every single child will react differently. Still, vaccinating parents continually take that risk.

The resultant damage, including brain death, from the toxins in vaccines can vary from mild enough not to be apparent, through to severe, and in possibly death. You cannot inject a living being with these toxins and poisons and expect there to be no adverse effect at all.

Vaccines have been falsely heralded as one of the wonders of modern medicine, a triumph of science versus nature.

However, that claim is continually not supported by current research. Yet most, if not all people, whether they be doctors, pharmacists and/or the very developers of these vaccines that speak out against vaccines, or question their safety, become ridiculed by the big pharmaceutical companies. Any and all research or statistics gets discredited or destroyed. Their name gets slandered. Their credibility and reputation destroyed. Why is that? Why is it that any parent that questions vaccines, and chooses not to vaccinate because of the overwhelming evidence that vaccines are not effective and their safety not proven, is labeled “a quack”, or “irresponsible”, and their non-vaccinated child labeled “a threat to the vaccinated”.

The main questions regarding vaccinations that every single parent should ask themselves are as follows;

1. How effective are they?

2. How dangerous is the disease?

3. How dangerous is the vaccine?

4. Are combination vaccines more dangerous?

5. What are the alternatives to vaccination?

So, just how effective are vaccines?

Scientific literature is far from conclusive on the effectiveness of vaccinations. Reports vary, claiming anything from 20-90% effectiveness, depending on the vaccine. The fact is however, many epidemic diseases come in cycles, and have declined due to improvements in sanitation, as well as isolation of those people infected with the disease, not because of the vaccines.

A case in point is the 1870-1872 smallpox epidemic in England. The outbreak claimed 44,000 lives, even though most of the population had been vaccinated. During the next outbreak in 1892, the town of Leicester decided against vaccination on the grounds that it didn’t work, and instead relied only on sanitation and isolation. This outbreak saw just 19 cases and one death per 100,000. Compare this to nearby Warrington that had six times as many cases and eleven times the death rate, even though 99 percent of its population had been vaccinated. [Campaign against Fraudulent Medical Research Newsletter 2(3):5-13 (1995), quoting statistics from the London Bills of Mortality 1760-1834 and Reports of the Registrar General 1836-1896, as compiled by Alfred Wallace in The Wonderful Century (1898)]

And, despite the use of vaccination, the incidence of many infectious diseases still continues to rise and fall. For example, in the United States, the incidence of measles continued to rise all the way into the 1990s, despite the introduction of the vaccine in 1957. And in England in the 1970s, deaths from pertussis (whooping cough) dropped only after the vaccination rate dropped by 30%.

Measles, mumps, smallpox, whooping cough, polio, and meningitis outbreaks have all occurred in vaccinated populations. In 1989, the Center for Disease Control (CDC) reported, “Among school-aged children, [measles] outbreaks have occurred in schools with vaccination levels of greater than 98 percent. [They] have occurred in all parts of the country, including areas that had not reported measles for years.” The CDC even reported a measles outbreak in a population that had been 100 percent vaccinated. A study examining this outbreak found, “The apparent paradox is that as measles immunization rates rise to high levels in a population, measles becomes a disease of immunized persons.”

Finally, there is the age old false belief that the “success” story for vaccination is polio. Yet, during a 1962 U.S. Congressional hearing, Dr. Bernard Greenberg, head of the Department of Biostatistics for the University of North Carolina School of Public Health, testified that cases of polio not only increased after mandatory vaccinations-up 50% from 1957 to 1958, and up 80% from 1958 to 1959 — but that the statistics were deliberately manipulated by the Public Health Service to give the opposite impression.

Because vaccinations for polio are for specific strains of polio microbes that are permanently evolving and changing, there’s no guarantee of protection. Infact, an outbreak of polio occurred in Taiwan, where 98% of young children had been immunized. [Patriarca, P.A. 1994. Polio outbreaks: a tale of torment. Lancet 344(8923):630-631]

In 1961, a polio outbreak in Massachusetts resulted in more cases of paralysis among those vaccinated than those who were not. [James, W. 1988. Immunization: The Reality Behind the Myth. Praeger Publishers, Westport, CT.] And another study found that three out of five Americans who had contracted polio during foreign travel had previously been vaccinated. [Strebel, P.M., et al. 1992. Epidemiology of poliomyelitis in the United States one decade after the last reported case of indigenous wild virus-associated disease. Clin Infect Dis 14:568-579

Arguably, some diseases are more life threatening, and more prevalent, than others. For example, measles and mumps are very common, yet are rarely fatal, except in poorly nourished infants with compromised immune systems. Therefore, if your child is optimally nourished, you can make a good case for choosing not to vaccinate.

According to medical studies, whooping cough is no longer a serious threat to the life and health of children. Among well-nourished children in the U.K., there were no cases of brain damage or death in any children during three different outbreaks in the country. However, more adults have contracted whooping cough since the introduction of early immunization, which may suggest that the vaccine is not suppressing the disease.

As well, the vaccine for whooping cough, accounts for more than half of all reported reactions to vaccinations. Since whooping cough is rarely deadly among well-nourished children, there is a serious question in regards to the benefits of the vaccine in view of its known risks. According to research, a child vaccinated against whooping cough is 50% more likely to develop asthma or allergies later in life. This may be because the whooping cough vaccine promotes an abnormally strong immune response to potential allergens such as pollen or gluten, and may disturb early immune programming

Tetanus is even rarer, and, when treated correctly, 90% of people recover. As well, tetanus can be easily controlled. You can massively reduce the risk simply by cleaning wounds properly.

Meningitis most often affects children between the ages of 6 to 12 months, with 75% of all cases occurring before the age of two. Lack of hygiene in day care centers is partly blamed for the spread of the disease.

More recently the focus was on a new form of meningitis caused by the bacteria Neissetia meningirides-meningitis C. While much rarer, it can be fatal about 10% of the time. Unfortunately, these vaccines are still so new, it is still hard to say how effective they are and what side effects they may have.

I believe that the most important fact involving vaccines is the use of the many ingredients they contain, and the very real threat they pose to health.

For example, most vaccines contain a germicidal compound called thimerosal, which consisted-in part-of mercury. Many vaccines also contain formalin, a 37% solution of formaldehyde, the main ingredient of embalming fluid! Many vaccines also contain phenol or ethylene glycol, the main component found in antifreeze! While all of these ingredients are disturbing, thimerosal is particularly concerning, not only because mercury is a highly toxic element, but many, many children are allergic to this compound.

A recent investigation into thimerosal and the neurological development of children found that the sum total of mercury an average child would receive from normally recommended vaccinations, far exceeds the Federal Safety Guidelines for orally ingested mercury, and is in fact correlated with a greater risk for neurodevelopmental disorders. Galer, M.R and Galer, D.A. 2003. [Thimerosal in childhood vaccines, neurodevelopment disorders and heart disease in the United States. Journal of American Physicians and Surgeons 8(1):6-11]

As for Combination Vaccines, no one yet really knows the combined risks of having a number of vaccinations. Two of the most common combination vaccinations MMR and DPT, were thoroughly investigated by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

In monitoring 500,000 American children after vaccination, 34 major side effects were identified, the most common being seizures. Researchers found that the day after a DPT shot, children were three times more likely to have a fit. After the MMR injection, fits were 2.7 times higher after 4-7 days and 3.3 times higher after 8-14 days. And that’s just seizures. In some cases, DPT reactions have resulted in permanent neurological damage (1 in 30-50,000 children vaccinated) and even death.

Meanwhile, the link between MMR and the risk of autism is growing. According to a statistical analysis published in a recent issue of the Lancet, the correct interpretation of the statistical data from currently published studies show an appreciable number of autism cases being triggered by MMR vaccination.

It only makes sense that a child’s developing, immature immune system is more likely to react to a combination of infectious agents delivered in one vaccination. Vaccinations also have the very real possibility of overloading an immune system, resulting in toxic damage to their nervous system and brain.

Alternatives to Vaccination?

Really the best alternative to vaccination is to simply ensure that your child has a robust immune system. For infants, there is no better way to strengthen their immunity than through breastfeeding. While breastfeeding for at least their first year of life is most optimal; any breastfeeding your child receives is most beneficial in helping your child develop a healthy, strong immune system. As for an older child who is weaned, you can help to ensure immunity by providing an optimal intake of immune boosting nutrients found in a variety healthy, nutritious foods. .

Most importantly, use your common sense. The truth is, we do not have all the answers and do not know the long term consequences of mass immunization. This is why some pediatricians are opting against vaccinations. In the meantime, gather all the information you can, then allow the facts rather than fear or social pressure guide your decision.

April 21, 2012

Parents Urged To Ignore Vaccine Injury Symptoms And, Instead, ‘Soothe’ Their Babies

Comments By What Really Happened dot com. My comments in parenthesis:
First they said vaccines don’t cause seizures, remember? But now, as the truth about the seizures has come out (thanks to the internet), the vaccine-pushing doctors are saying the seizures are GOOD for your baby, because that means the vaccines are working! (yeah, they’re working alright.)

In fact, they’re now telling parents that when their babies have a vaccine seizure, they should “soothe” their babies and ignore the seizure. Yep, while the vaccine eats your baby’s brain, you’re supposed to think it’s great! (Are parents today really this dumbed down?)
—————————————————————————
As children’s brains are being eaten by vaccines, parents urged to ignore the symptoms and ‘soothe’ their babies
http://www.naturalnews.com/035639_vaccines_babies_convulsions.html#ixzz1skL0bixw

Saturday, April 21, 2012 by: Jonathan Benson, staff writer

(NaturalNews)
A recent study published in the journal Pediatrics suggests that administering one or more of the five “Ss” — swaddling, side/stomach position, shushing, swinging, and sucking — to babies in conjunction with their childhood vaccine regimens can help alleviate the physical and emotional stress typically brought about by this highly-invasive medical tradition.

Swaddling babies, or wrapping them in a warm blanket after they are vaccinated, as well as placing them in certain positions can help reduce their levels of anxiety, say researchers. Gently shushing them while rocking them or giving them a pacifier can also help to make the vaccination process move along much more smoothly and less painfully.

Though these measures do absolutely nothing to address the potential neurological damage caused by vaccines, researchers say they can “soothe” babies and help them to stop crying. According to Dr. John W. Harrington from Eastern Virginia Medical School and Children’s Hospital of the King’s Daughters in Norfolk, the methods serve as a “distraction” from the pain caused by the needles.

For their study, Harrington and his colleagues divided 234 two- and four-month-old babies into four study groups, two of which received the five Ss after their vaccinations. They found that those who received these interventions experienced less visible pain, grimacing, and frowning, according to Reuters, and they cried less.

But as good as it might be to effectively comfort a child who has just been bombarded with dozens of vaccine injections, no amount of physical comfort will mitigate the damage being done to babies’ brains by vaccines. The combination diphtheria, pertussis and tetanus shot, also known as DPT, for instance, is known to cause severe and permanent brain damage in some children (http://www.naturalnews.com/031469_vaccine_brain_seizures.html).

All vaccines, in fact, come with the potential to cause permanent nerve damage, particularly in the brain. Going back as far as 1855, when Massachusetts passed the first law in the United States requiring vaccinations for schoolchildren, it was known that vaccines carried with them the risk of encephalitis, also known as inflammation of the brain (http://www.naturalnews.com/031476_vaccines_nerve_damage.html).

Brachial neuritis, chronic inflammatory demyelinating polyneuropathy (CIDP), complex regional pain syndrome (CRPS), Guillain-Barre syndrome (GBS), multiple sclerosis, narcolepsy, Opsoclonus-Myoclonus syndrome (OMS), trigeminal neuralgia, and transverse myelitis are among the many neurological side effects that can be caused by vaccines. And none of these conditions, of course, can be mitigated with a pacifier or a blanket.

Sources for this article include:

http://www.reuters.com

Related:
DPT vaccine causes permanent brain damage, 150 seizures a day in young girl
http://www.naturalnews.com/031469_vaccine_brain_seizures.html

April 12, 2012

Big Pharma Finds A New Way To Reduce PROSECUTABLE Vaccine Injury Cases.

Editor’s Note:
Let’s face it. The ONLY vaccine injury cases the pharmacological industrial complex can NOT weasel their way out of are the cases where the VICTIM is having convulsions directly after taking the shot. This same medical establishment could care less about vaccine injury cases that occur weeks or even days after a vaccine is given. By that time, the vaccine pushers can claim everything BUT, the vaccine is at fault.

Even with the vaccine pushers legally protected from MOST prosecution once the vaccine VICTIM leaves the doctors office, the number of vaccine injuries right after a vaccine is given, is still quite high. The Gardasil vaccine alone has pushed those numbers (people) into the stratosphere.

I have been waiting for the medical establishment to pull this very crap right out of their legal department’s ass. It doesn’t take a doctor with a Phd to see the REAL reason for drugging babies, children and teenagers BEFORE they get their poison. If you drug the infant, child, teen BEFORE the injection they stand a far less chance of showing VISIBLE signs of having a seizure. Even though, the CAUSE of having the seizure will still be going on inside their body, the injury will be simply MASKED by the drugs until they ware off. That gives the vaccine pushers time to get your infant, child, teen out the door and, any damage that shows up later is YOUR PROBLEM.

If you refuse the ‘drug treatment’ before the injection, that’s OK too. If your infant, child teen have the standard seizures, paralysis… that comes with these poisons the medical establishment, in their typical slime ball way, will simply blame the seizures ON YOU for NOT getting your infant, child, teen drugged BEFORE the injection.

Watch vaccine injuries cases dramatically decrease and watch the slime balls promote this as the vaccines themselves being the reasons why.

YEAH, RIGHT!
—————————————————————————–

Drug babies before vaccinating them, doctors demand

Wednesday, April 11, 2012 by: Ethan A. Huff, staff writer
http://www.naturalnews.com/035532_vaccinations_babies_Tylenol.html#ixzz1rtIoKRFH

(NaturalNews) A recent study published in the journal Pediatrics suggests that giving eight-week-old babies several doses of acetaminophen (Tylenol) before and after the barrage of recommended childhood vaccines they typically receive will help them to sleep better, and improve vaccine efficacy. And because many doctors believe that sleeping after vaccinations is a positive sign that vaccines are supposedly “working,” this dangerous protocol could become common practice among pediatric doctors when administering childhood vaccines.

Linda Franck and her colleagues at the University of California, San Francisco’s (UCSF) Department of Family Health Care Nursing conducted a randomized, controlled trial on 70 infants that technically constitutes child abuse. For their study, the team told one group of mothers to administer standard care to their babies, while the other was told to give their babies a heavy load of pre-dosed acetaminophen 30 minutes before receiving their vaccines, and every four hours after that for a total of five doses.

At the conclusion of the study, the team observed that acetaminophen helped the babies to sleep more, and also allegedly helped to increase their antibody production rates. Franck and her colleagues also made the suggestion based on their findings that young babies receive their vaccinations in the afternoon rather than in the morning, so that sleep would come more naturally in the 24 hours that followed.

It is bad enough that babies are injected with upwards of 20 vaccines within the first few months of their lives (http://www.cdc.gov). But now researchers want to give these delicate, developing human beings large doses of acetaminophen, which has been shown in numerous studies to cause liver and kidney damage, and even death (http://www.lef.org).

Acetaminophen has never been proven safe for children

In fact, according to a recent review by Vactruth.com, a U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) scientific panel back in 2007 recommended that acetaminophen no longer be recommended for children under six years of age because of its extreme toxicity. The FDA ignored this recommendation, however, and continues to recommend acetaminophen for young children, even though it has never been proven safe for this age group (http://vactruth.com/2012/03/30/babies-sleep-drugged-vaccinated/).

Back in 2009, a study out of the Czech Republic found the opposite of what the UCSF researchers found, observing that the administration of acetaminophen before and after vaccinations actually obstructs the supposed effectiveness of the vaccines. Conducted by Dr. Roman Prymula from the University of Defence, that study revealed that acetaminophen reduces the immune response to vaccines, which mainstream medicine considers an indicator that the vaccines are functioning as intended (http://abcnews.go.com).

And a 2008 study published in the journal Lancet also found that babies who are given acetaminophen within the first year of their lives are 46 percent more likely than other babies to develop asthma. According to Richard Beasley from the Medical Research Institute of New Zealand who conducted the study, acetaminophen reduces antioxidant levels in babies’ bodies, which makes them more prone to oxidative stress and lung damage.

Sources for this article include:

http://www.reuters.com

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/33331643/ns/health-kids_and_parenting/

Blog at WordPress.com.