Vaccine News – Doctors Against Vaccines – Hear From Those Who Have Done the Research

Doctors Against Vaccines – Hear From Those Who Have Done the Research
June 7, 2015 by Joel Edwards
Last updated on: May 21, 2016
The general public shares a common misconception – that all doctors, or all “real doctors” support vaccination. Although it is true that the majority of doctors support vaccines, not all do.
Most doctors blindly support the recommendations of the American Medical Association and the American Academy of Pediatrics. Doctors are trained in administering vaccines, not in how they are made. There are some doctors that choose to do the research themselves in order to develop an informed opinion on the subject. These doctors who become knowledgeable about vaccines usually become anti-vaccine. A little knowledge goes a long way.
Without a doubt we live in the age of autism, but it is also the age of chronic illness. One in eighty-eight children are diagnosed with autism, while half of all children now struggle with chronic illnesses such as asthma, diabetes, ADHD, etc. This rise in illness correlates with the dramatic increase in vaccines given to our children along with a growing exposure to other toxic chemicals

1918 Spanish Flu Was Caused By Vaccinations, Shocking Report
May 13, 2015 Sean Adl-Tabatabai
Shortly after the First World War, vaccine makers had an excess supply of vaccines (originally intended for soldiers to treat yellow fever), as a result of the relatively unexpected short duration of the war.
A huge vaccination campaign was drummed up to vaccinate the population against “foreign illnesses” the troops were returning with. The vaccines administered to most of the population made people extremely ill with cases of high fever, extreme weakness, abdominal rash, and intestinal disturbances characteristic of typhoid, to name but a few symptoms.
In order to treat these symptoms pharmaceutical companies and doctors developed stronger vaccines to treat the symptoms of the previous ones. The ongoing asault of ever-stronger vaccines being administered to the public created a widespread epidemic of vaccine related illnesses which the government were forced to blame on Spanish Flu.

Exclusive: The Spanish Influenza Epidemic Of 1918 Was Caused By Vaccinations
Published on October 15, 2013
Therefore, there will be no swine flu epidemic unless the vaccine promoters make one like they did in the 1918 flu epidemic. It will not kill 20,000,000 people unless the people submit to the disease-producing shots. There are also, other causes of disease besides vaccines, such as bad food, which has been devitalized and contaminated with poison preservatives and artificial drug concoctions. There are many more causes of disease but no diseases are contagious.
Vaccine drives come and go as often as the vaccine promoters can cook up the slightest pretense of a reason.n Back in1957 they were trying to stir up a vaccination campaign for what they decided to call Asiatic flu. An editorial in the Herald and Express for August 29, 1957 was captioned, “Fear of Flu Propaganda.” Part of the piece is as follows:
“What a tempest in a teapot has been blown up over the probability that this country will experience an epidemic of the Asiatic flu in the fall and winter months ahead.
“Even the United States Department of Health is stooge for the panic — and has issued statements which are frightening the public, rather than reassuring them by pointing out that this epidemic, while widespread, gives no indication of being any more dangerous than our usual flood of influenza-like colds when winter comes on.
“Those who read between the lines even wonder whether the whole thing might not be a bit of super salesmanship on the part of those who are making and selling the vaccines which are being prepared.. . .”

What the News Isn’t Saying About Vaccine-Autism Studies
by sattkisson    on November 27, 2016
A new study this week found no link between vaccines and autism. It instantly made headlines on TV news and popular media everywhere. Many billed it as the final word, “once again,” disproving the notion that vaccines could have anything to do with autism.
What you didn’t learn on the news was that the study was from a consulting firm that lists major vaccine makers among its clients: The Lewin Group.
That potential conflict of interest was not disclosed in the paper published in The New England Journal of Medicine; the study authors simply declare “The Lewin Group operates with editorial independence.”
(As an aside, according to OpenSecrets.org, The Lewin Group’s parent company, UnitedHealth Group, is a key government partner in Obamacare. Its subsidiary QSSI was given the contract to build the federal government’s HealthCare.gov website. One of its top executives and his family are top Obama donors.)
Conflicts of interest alone do not invalidate a study. But they serve as important context in the relentless effort by pharmaceutical interests and their government partners to discredit the many scientists and studies that have found possible vaccine-autism links.
Many Studies Suggest Possible Vaccine-Autism Links

Quit Using Immunocompromised People to Promote Your Vaccine Agenda
CDC, I’m talking to you. Media, I’m talking to you. Pediatricians, I’m talking to you. Parents who shame other parents, I’m talking to you. Using immunocompromised people as pawns in a vaccine-pushing agenda that twists scientific data to manipulate emotions is abhorrent.
As the mother of a child with an immunodeficiency, I can say with certainty there is no human on this planet who cares more about his health and well being than I do. I can also say with certainty that the push to vaccinate for the sake of the immunocompromised has nothing to do with science and everything to do with an agenda.
Once upon a time, listening only to propaganda and not bothering to read the fine print, I lined up for the flu shot to “protect” my son. That was before I understood these facts.
Vaccine induced herd immunity doesn’t exist. You, of course, are supposed to believe it does and you’re supposed to believe if you don’t vaccinate your child, my son could suffer or even die. The concept of herd immunity is promoted to coerce people to do their part for the immunocompromised but it isn’t supported by factual data.

The Hate Debate
Megan Heimer April 15, 2014
I am sick of it … this vaccination debate. My convictions not to vaccinate have been firm for eight years now and I was comfortable living a low-profile life and letting other more notable activists carry the torch; and then I started seeing misleading t.v. interviews, news stories, and backlash against parents and unvaccinated children. I saw reputable medical professionals get crucified and reputations destroyed for questioning the mainstream norm. I saw laws passed in other states removing freedoms that rightfully belong to parents and individuals as a whole. I saw fear, blame, finger-pointing, lies, and flat-out hate being propagated and encouraged by people, physicians, and popular media avenues towards parents who don’t vaccinate, and their children.
This isn’t a vaccination debate – it’s a hate debate, so let’s call it what it is. When it got personal I got involved, so let’s clear a few things up:
I am not an “anti-vaxxer” or a “disinformation  activist.”
I am a parent. Some people believe that parents can’t make an educated decision on this issue, that you should check all of your questions and reservations about vaccinating at the door and trust your physician, that is unless your physician also questions vaccines (or supports a delayed schedule), then he’s a quack.

Dr. Suzanne Humphries, M.D. – Vaccine Strain of Measles Virus Found in Measles Outbreaks
May 19, 2017
Dr. Suzanne Humphries is a practicing nephrologist (kidney physician). In this lecture (video below), she addresses a study done in Croatia [1] where a child who was vaccinated with the MMR vaccine was tested positive for the measles vaccine strain Schwarz eight days after vaccination.
This was a significant finding, because the child’s symptoms were thought to be similar to rubella, and without testing, the sickness would have been possibly mis-diagnosed as rubella, or the wild-type strain of measles the vaccine is designed to protect against.
This concept of “shedding,” where the child comes down with the disease from the virus in the vaccine itself, surprised the researchers:
Virus excretion in vaccinees has been reported before, but to our knowledge, this is documented for the first time for the Schwarz vaccine strain. [1]
Since 2010, this phenomena of vaccine shedding with measles in the MMR vaccine has been observed in at least two other studies:
Differentiating the wild from the attenuated during a measles outbreak. Paediatrcis and Child Health, 2012:
In the midst of a local measles outbreak, a recently immunized child was investigated for a new-onset measles-type rash. Nucleic acid testing identified that a vaccine-type measles virus was being shed in the urine. Clinically differentiating measles from a nonmeasles rash is challenging, but can be supported by a thorough medical history evaluation. Rashes are expected to occur after immunization; nucleic acid testing can be used when it is difficult to differentiate between wild and attenuated strains. [2]
Case of vaccine-associated measles five weeks post-immunisation, British Columbia, Canada, Eurosurveillance, 2013:
We describe a case of vaccine-associated measles in a two-year-old patient from British Columbia, Canada, in October 2013, who received her first dose of measles-containing vaccine 37 days prior to onset of prodromal symptoms. Identification of this delayed vaccine-associated case occurred in the context of an outbreak investigation of a measles cluster. [3]
Are health officials testing cases of measles in the current outbreak in the United States, to determine if the measles strain is the wild strain of the vaccine strain?
Not likely, and it is not likely that the mainstream media “TV doctors” will even discuss this as they falsely vilify parents who choose not to administer the MMR vaccine to their children as the cause of these outbreaks. Some of these cases are confirmed to be among those who have received the MMR vaccine, and for those who have not been vaccinated, is it possible they were infected from those recently vaccinated when the vaccine was still “shedding,” and that the vaccine-strain of measles was passed on from the vaccinated child to the unvaccinated child?

Former Merck Rep Says Mandatory Vaccination Is For Profit and Not Public Health
Larry Cook August 5, 2015

Former Merck Rep Says Mandatory Vaccination Is For Profit and Not Public Health
Brandy Vaughan is a former sales rep for Merck & Co. – a vaccine maker – and she details how vaccine companies are using vaccines as a vehicle for massive profit and not public health. Brandy researched the safety of vaccines and found that not only do vaccines contain known toxins that can cause neurological damage, but that vaccine makers do not create the same safety studies for vaccines as they do for other drugs. This lack of true safety research of vaccines combined with the known adverse reactions to vaccination has helped Brandy to decide to never vaccinate her own child. Brandy says giving children a vaccine is like playing Russian roulette with our children and that mandatory vaccination is simply a way for vaccine makers to profit off of our children. Don’t be fooled: we do not need mandatory vaccination.
Produced by Larry Cook
Founder and Director of www.StopMandatoryVaccination.com

Mirror UK – Baby girl dies just 24 hours after contracting meningitis even though she had all the right jabs
Zoe O’Connor and her partner were forced to say their final goodbyes to baby Ava after awful rash came over her body in hospitals
An adorable baby girl has died 24 hours after contracting meningitis – despite having all her jabs to prevent the disease.
Zoe O’Connor, 29, from Swansea, and partner Jamie Jeremiah, 34, were forced to say their final goodbyes to their baby daughter Ava after she contracted meningitis and septicaemia.
The devastated mum-of-three and her partner had only just celebrated Ava’s first birthday and had taken all the precautions to prevent meningitis by having the newly introduced vaccinations.

Natural News – If vaccines are 100% safe and have harmed no one, then why did the U.S. government pay out over $3 billion in awards to thousands of families damaged by vaccines?
Wednesday, May 17, 2017 by: Vicki Batts
(Natural News) While the mainstream media may love to laud vaccines, and proponents of the vaccine agenda praise Big Pharma’s injections as a holy grail for humanity, the truth is that vaccines are not some kind of flawless gift to civilization. Vaccines, like everything else in life, are not and cannot be guaranteed to be 100 percent safe. Even something as seemingly innocuous as water can be fatal, even in a small amount.
Not only would it be silly to assume that vaccines are perfect, it would go against all available facts about vaccines. The United States government has created a system for people who are harmed by vaccines, so they can report these events, and even make claims via a court system so families can receive financial restitution for their suffering.
But vaccines are harmless, right? Yet, the government has paid out over $3 billion in awards and legal fees for families and persons that have been affected by vaccine damage between the years of 1989 and 2015. In total, 3,937 cases have resulted in the awarding of financial compensation via the Vaccine Injury Compensation Program (VICP).
And those are just the ones who managed to convince the court that a vaccine damaged their child or themselves. Nearly 10,000 people have had their cases dismissed by the court. This is unsurprising, because as you might imagine, it can be difficult to convince the court. Very difficult.
National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program Statistics Report 2015

 

Vaccine News – 130 Research papers supporting Vaccine/Autism CausationGinger Taylor, MS

Gardasil: The decision we will always regret
February 4, 2014
By Kim Robinson, Red Hill, Pennsylvania
Katie’s Gardasil Experience
By all accounts, our daughter was normal before receiving the HPV vaccine.  Katie performed very well in school.  She was conscientious, hard-working and took pride in getting good grades.  She loved dancing having taken dance classes since she was 3 years old.  Katie always danced and twirled throughout our home and anywhere else she happened to be.  When Katie was 10, she joined cheerleading and became involved in competition cheerleading.  She was very active, taking four hours of dance class every week plus spending many more hours practicing with her competition cheer team.  Katie was healthy and vibrant.
We were very diligent with our children’s health.  We never missed an annual check-up and we also followed the pediatrician’s recommended vaccine schedule including annual flu shots.  Our pediatrician recommended the Gardasil vaccine.  The Gardasil vaccine was heavily advertised on TV.  We read the vaccine Disclosure.  It said that the vaccine should not be given to those with HIV.  Katie did not have HIV so we signed the Consent.
On September 2, 2010 at the age of 11, Katie received the first Gardasil vaccine.  Katie’s first day of middle school was September 7, 2010.  Initially, we believed that her fatigue and headaches were being caused by having to get up much earlier in the morning for middle school.  However, she never adjusted to the new schedule and soon her symptoms began exploding.  Katie would often tell us “I don’t know what’s wrong, I just don’t feel good.”  She began sleeping a lot – over 12 hours a day and even more on the weekends, which would allow her gather enough energy to go to school a few days before she crashed again.  She missed days at school, dance lessons and cheer practices.  Soon her illness was visible on the outside too.  Katie didn’t look good – constant dark circles under her eyes, her skin color was ashen and she appeared listless.

Gardasil Is Destroying Our Daughters And Nobody Cares!
Posted on February 20, 2017 by Jacqui Deevoy
This is the cry from Gini Blesky, one of thousands of mothers worldwide whose young daughters’ lives have been devastated by the ‘side-effects’ of government-approved HPV vaccine Gardasil.
The much-debated vaccine, developed to prevent HPV (which can lead to cervical cancer) – given to girls around the world at around the age of 12 – has been in the spotlight for some time now, with stories popping up on social media and alternative radio networks and with no thanks whatsoever to the mainstream media.
As a journalist, mother and general truth-seeker, I’ve had a personal interest in this controversial vaccine for many years. When it was first introduced, I refused to let my teenage daughters have it, after I’d tried to research it and found nothing. My general feeling at the time was that the introduction of it seemed a bit sudden and I wasn’t altogether comfortable with that.
But it was while I was trying – and failing – to get the UK mainstream media to publish a story about the dangers of this vaccine that I realized that the refusal of the publications I approached to give it any exposure was a story in itself! So here I am…
Because of my personal interest in the story (by this time, I’d met several girls whose lives and families had been severely affected by illness after the jab and I’d discovered that two families I was related to had also been affected), I was keen to put out a warning. While many countries were working on withdrawing the vaccine due to the damage it was causing, other countries – the UK and US included – were stepping up the programme. In recent months, there’s even been talk of giving the vaccine to boys.
If anyone wants an interview with Gini Blesky, please call 07514 64 366 or email jacqui.deevoy@gmail.com
To get more info about AHVID, please contact Freda Birrell on 07752 945 545 or at jeanfreda8@btinternet.com
You can contact Gini Blesky and follow Mia’s progress via Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/gini.kok
Mia’s GoFundMe appeal is at: https://www.gofundme.com/mias-recovery-fund

New Vaccines Will Permanently Alter Human DNA
Why is the government so maniacal about injecting vaccines?
by Jon Rappoport
Consider this article in light of the accelerating push to mandate and enforce vaccination across the planet.
The reference is the New York Times, 3/9/2015, “Protection Without a Vaccine.” It describes the frontier of research. Here are key quotes that illustrate the use of synthetic genes to “protect against disease,” while changing the genetic makeup of humans.
This is not science fiction:
“By delivering synthetic genes into the muscles of the [experimental] monkeys, the scientists are essentially re-engineering the animals to resist disease.”
“’The sky’s the limit,’ said Michael Farzan, an immunologist at Scripps and lead author of the new study.”
“The first human trial based on this strategy — called immunoprophylaxis by gene transfer, or I.G.T. — is underway, and several new ones are planned.”
“I.G.T. is altogether different from traditional vaccination. It is instead a form of gene therapy. Scientists isolate the genes that produce powerful antibodies against certain diseases and then synthesize artificial versions. The genes are placed into viruses and injected into human tissue, usually muscle.”
Here is the punchline:
“The viruses invade human cells with their DNA payloads, and the synthetic gene is incorporated into the recipient’s own DNA. If all goes well, the new genes instruct the cells to begin manufacturing powerful antibodies.”
Read that again: “the synthetic gene is incorporated into the recipient’s own DNA.” Alteration of the human genetic makeup. Permanent alteration.
The Times article taps Dr. David Baltimore for an opinion:
“Still, Dr. Baltimore says that he envisions that some people might be leery of a vaccination strategy that means altering their own DNA, even if it prevents a potentially fatal disease.”
Yes, some people might be leery. If they have two or three working brain cells.

Protection Without a Vaccine By CARL ZIMMERMARCH 9, 2015
Last month, a team of scientists announced what could prove to be an enormous step forward in the fight against H.I.V.
Scientists at Scripps Research Institute said they had developed an artificial antibody that, once in the blood, grabbed hold of the virus and inactivated it. The molecule can eliminate H.I.V. from infected monkeys and protect them from future infections.
But this treatment is not a vaccine, not in any ordinary sense. By delivering synthetic genes into the muscles of the monkeys, the scientists are essentially re-engineering the animals to resist disease. Researchers are testing this novel approach not just against H.I.V., but also Ebola, malaria, influenza and hepatitis.
“The sky’s the limit,” said Michael Farzan, an immunologist at Scripps and lead author of the new study.
Continue reading the main story
Dr. Farzan and other scientists are increasingly hopeful that this technique may be able to provide long-term protection against diseases for which vaccines have failed. The first human trial based on this strategy — called immunoprophylaxis by gene transfer, or I.G.T. — is underway, and several new ones are planned.
“It could revolutionize the way we immunize against public health threats in the future,” said Dr. Gary J. Nabel, the chief scientific officer of Sanofi, a pharmaceutical company that produces a wide range of vaccines.
Whether I.G.T. will succeed is still an open question. Researchers still need to gauge its safety and effectiveness in humans. And the prospect of genetically engineering people to resist infectious diseases may raise concerns among patients.

Three Examples of Pro-Vaccination Hypocrisy By Tami Canal On February 20, 2017
The common sense, or lack thereof, of some people truly baffles me and I have reached a point where I’m going to call out the hypocrisy of certain individuals. If the following offends you, I make no apologies. Instead, I encourage you to focus your outrage on the thousands of innocent victims of the CDC’s vaccination program. (Read more about that by clicking here: http://vaccineimpact.com/2016/vaccine-court-stats-on-injuries-and-deaths-betray-governments-position-on-vaccine-safety/)
If you advocate for any of the following issues, but allow your child to be vaccinated…you are a hypocrite.
1. Pro-Life
You cannot be pro-life and pro-vaccine…unless there’s a clause in the pro-life rule book that allows for the use of aborted fetal cells in vaccinations given to humans.
This is not fear-mongering or “woo”, as the trolls will cry. It’s a plain and simple fact that a minimum of 27 vaccines contain aborted fetal tissue, DNA, proteins and cells including:
-Hep A
-Hep A/Hep B Combo
-Polio
-Dtap/Polio/HiB Combo
-MMR
-MMRV Pro Quad
-Varicella
-Shingles
It’s shocking that little to no religious outcry exists and it’s mind boggling that pro-life advocates will denounce abortion, but seemingly condone the use of aborted fetal elements in vaccinations given to children.
It’s also imperative that I mention that the research that is available on the safety of injecting human DNA into another human shows that there may be radical immune responses and can even cause death.

Top government scientists refuse to vaccinate their children
By: Vicki Batts Date: August 19, 2016
How shocking is it that New Mexico, the school district with the highest percentage of students whose families are opting out of vaccines, is actually one of the state’s most scientifically literate communities?
Well, if you know how harmful vaccines really are, you might not really be all that surprised. But for many, the 2.3 percent of students forgoing traditional vaccine regimens in Los Alamos is causing quite the upset. After all, many of the parents in the community work for US Los Alamos Labs, or one of the other scientific organizations that call the area home. For example, the Los Alamos National Laboratory has even conducted extensive research and development on a vaccine for HIV.
The Superintendent of the Los Alamos school systems has said that he finds the high rate of parents exempting their children from vaccination “curious,” given that it is a “pretty scientific and literate community.”
While the mainstream media continues to come up with all kinds of wild  reasons for why “anti-vaxxers” don’t vaccinate their children, a community of scientists continues to abstain from the practice, much to the chagrin of pro-vaccine activists. Los Alamos is not alone; Santa Fe’s percentage of children not getting jabbed was just a few points behind, at 2.1 percent.
Anna Pentler, the head of the New Mexico Immunization Coalition (a pro-vaccine group) seems to think that not wanting to inject their children with toxic adjuvants and heavy metals is an “emotional issue,” and not an issue of ethics and morality. She says that while the science could be “99 to 1″ in favor of vaccines, a parent’s anecdotal story of how vaccines harmed their child could easily sway another parent’s opinion.
While it is true that the countless horror stories that many parents and children are forced to endure post-vaccination are enough to give any reasonable parent pause, the fact is that the science behind vaccine damage is also all there. The problem is that no one wants to believe it; no one wants their reality disrupted.
As the Children’s Medical Safety Research Institute states, “[T]here is a large body of scientific evidence confirming numerous vaccine safety deficits that counteract well-publicized benefits. For example, several studies show that thimerosal (mercury) and aluminum in vaccines can cause neurological, immunological and developmental harm.”
The CDC itself has conducted investigations on the harmful effects of certain ingredients in vaccines, and found that they did in fact disrupt neurological development in young children. But the mainstream media doesn’t care about that; they want you to fall in line and do your “due diligence” by getting vaccinated to maintain society’s “herd immunity” – which isn’t even real, by the way.

The Herd Immunity Myth – Treating Our Children Like Cattle
February 22, 2017
by Joanna Karpasea-Jones from VaccineRiskAwareness.com
When my oldest child was a baby, after telling the health visitor I didn’t vaccinate, she promptly exclaimed, “Oh well, she’s lucky as she has herd immunity from the vaccinated children to protect her!”
She then went on to say that not everyone had the luxury of my decision because if less than 95% of children were vaccinated, then it wouldn’t work anymore. I thought this was a silly concept because if vaccination truly worked, then any child who was vaccinated would be protected from disease, no matter how many ‘infectious’ unvaccinated kids there were, and if the 95% herd immunity figure was a genuine argument, it only points to one thing: the medical profession don’t really believe in the effectiveness of their own vaccines.
What Is The Herd Immunity Theory?
The herd immunity theory was originally coined in 1933 by a researcher called Hedrich. He had been studying measles patterns in the US between 1900-1931 (years before any vaccine was ever invented for measles) and he observed that epidemics of the illness only occurred when less than 68% of children had developed a natural immunity to it. This was based upon the principle that children build their own immunity after suffering with or being exposed to the disease. So the herd immunity theory was, in fact, about natural disease processes and nothing to do with vaccination. If 68% of the population were allowed to build their own natural defences, there would be no raging epidemic.
Later on, vaccinologists adopted the phrase and increased the figure from 68% to 95% with no scientific justification as to why, and then stated that there had to be 95% vaccine coverage to achieve immunity. Essentially, they took Hedrich’s study and manipulated it to promote their vaccination programmes.
(MONTHLY ESTIMATES OF THE CHILD POPULATION “SUSCEPTIBLE’ TO MEASLES, 1900-1931, BALTIMORE, MD, AW HEDRICH, American Journal of Epidemiology, May 1933 – Oxford University Press).
Why Vaccine Induced Herd Immunity is Flawed
If vaccination really immunises, then your vaccinated child will be immunised and therefore protected against any disease an unvaccinated child gets. If he isn’t, his shots didn’t work.
We should also examine whether or not the vaccines actually do provide immunity and in which populations epidemics occurred. Was it the unvaccinated children spreading disease as they would have parents believe? Or were those epidemics already in previously vaccinated people?
To do this I have listed several epidemics that have occurred in the last 100 years or so, including Smallpox, which medics claim that vaccination eradicated.
There was a Smallpox epidemic in Pittsburgh, USA, in 1924. This epidemic was started by a mandatory vaccination campaign in which people were imprisoned if they refused the shot. A health club then started a suit against Dr. Voux, who had headed the vaccination drive, for bringing disease upon the people. Legal council for the health club stated: ‘There have been NO deaths from Smallpox in Pittsburgh during the previous nine years from 1915 to 1924, including the years when there was no vaccination or re-vaccination, at all – and hence, no vaccine immunity.’
They pointed out that the vaccine campaign had caused 22 deaths and 112 cases of vaccine-induced Smallpox. (You can read a detailed history of vaccination in Eleanor McBean’s book, Vaccination Condemned, Better Life Research, 1981).
In Germany between 1947-1974, there were ten outbreaks of Smallpox including 94 people who had been previously ‘immunised’, who then became ill with the disease. (The Vaccination Nonsense, 2004 lectures, Dr. Gerhard Buchwald).
Here are some more recent epidemics in vaccinated populations:
In March 2006, 245 cases of mumps were confirmed in Iowa, US, where the law requires vaccination for school entry. Eleven year-old Will Hean of Davenport was diagnosed with mumps, and his 21 year old sister Kate.Both children had gotten the measles, mumps and rubella vaccine, or MMR. “He had all the shots and everything. You don’t think you’re going to get the mumps after you’ve been inoculated,” said Will’s father, Wayne Hean. (2006, The Associated Press).
In 2002 an outbreak of Varicella (Chickenpox) occurred in a US daycare centre for fully vaccinated children. Varicella developed in 25 of 88 children (28.4 percent) between December 1, 2000, and January 11, 2001. A case occurred in a healthy child who had been vaccinated three years previously and who infected more than 50 percent of his classmates who had no history of varicella. The effectiveness of the vaccine was 44.0 percent against disease of any severity.Children who had been vaccinated three years or more before the outbreak were at greater risk for vaccine failure than those who had been vaccinated more recently.
Conclusions: In this outbreak, vaccination provided poor protection against varicella. Longer interval since vaccination was associated with an increased risk of vaccine failure. Breakthrough infections in vaccinated, healthy persons can be as infectious as varicella in unvaccinated persons. (Outbreak of Varicella at a Day-Care Centre despite Vaccination – 2002 Karin Galil, M.D., M.P.H., Brent Lee, M.D., M.P.H., Tara Strine, M.P.H., Claire Carraher, R.N., Andrew L. Baughman, Ph.D., M.P.H., Melinda Eaton, D.V.M., Jose Montero, M.D., and Jane Seward, M.B., B.S., M.P.H.).
And here’s some vaccine failures for measles:
Five cases of measles secondary vaccine failure with confirmed seroconversion after live measles vaccination. (Scandinavian Journal of Infectious Disease vol. 29, no. 2, 1997, pp.187-90): Two, five, seven and twelve years after vaccination with further attenuated live measles vaccine, three of five patients experienced modified measles infection, and the remaining two had typical measles. “This may be the first SVF case report that confirms the existence of completely waning immunity in recipients of the further attenuated live measles vaccines.”
And Whooping Cough:
Journal of Infectious Diseases, vol. 179, April 1999; 915-923. Temporal trends in the population structure of bordetella pertussis during 1949-1996 in a highly vaccinated population- “Despite the introduction of large-scale pertussis vaccination in 1953 and high vaccination coverage, pertussis is still an endemic disease in The Netherlands, with epidemic outbreaks occurring every 3-5 years.” One factor that might contribute to this is the ability of pertussis strains to adapt to vaccine-induced immunity, causing new strains of pertussis to re-emerge in this well-vaccinated population.
Just recently, Dr. Kari Simonsen, a pediatrician at the University of Nebraska Medical Center, USA, said one in five children who are vaccinated for whooping cough will still get the disease. She said efficacy of the vaccine was ‘comparatively low’, but said ‘It’s the best vaccine we can build to date.’ Despite admitting this, she still believes that parents should get the vaccine for their children.
At St. Robert Bellarmine School in west Omaha, 12 children had confirmed whooping cough, of those, most had been vaccinated.
The Nebraska Department of Health and Human Services reported Thursday that the state has had 117 confirmed cases this year, up from 70 all of last year and 99 in 2006. There were 312 cases in Nebraska in 2005.
In Douglas County, 48 cases have been reported this year. Last year, 21 cases were reported.
This is in a country that gives five doses of the vaccine in the first four years of life and then another dose at 11 years of age!
(Omaha World Herald, ‘Vaccine Didn’t Stop Whooping Cough’, 31st October 2008).
Victor Plotkin – an epidemiologist from Lake County in the US has reported that there have been 82 cases of pertussis in the county so far this year.
‘Plotkin said the county did see very high numbers of cases during a nationwide outbreak of pertussis in 2004 and 2005. In 2004, there were 152 cases of pertussis and 135 cases in 2005. However, before that, pertussis cases in the county had averaged about 8 to 10 a year for many years.
Plotkin said the 2004 and 2005 pertussis outbreak appears that it may have been attributed to waning immunity among older children and adults who had not received booster shots. He said the most recent outbreak is a bit more puzzling because many of the children who are becoming ill are younger children who were recently vaccinated.
“Unfortunately, during this outbreak, even people that have been recently vaccinated are becoming sick anyway,” he said. “Their symptoms are milder, but they still can pass the bacteria along to others and make others sick.”
(Whooping Cough Increases in Lake County – the Vernon Hills Review 20th November 2008).

130 Research papers supporting Vaccine/Autism CausationGinger Taylor, MS
Mainstream research has found that vaccines and their ingredients can cause the underlying medical conditions that committed physicians and researchers are commonly finding in children who have been given an autism diagnosis. These conditions include gastrointestinal damage, immune system impairment, chronic infections, mitochondrial disorders, autoimmune conditions, neurological regression, glial cell activation, brain inflammation, damage to the blood–brain barrier, seizures, synaptic dysfunction, dendritic cell dysfunction, mercury poisoning, aluminum toxicity, gene activation and alteration, glutathione depletion, impaired methylation, oxidative stress, impaired thioredoxin regulation, mineral deficiencies, impairment of the opioid system, endocrine dysfunction, cellular apoptosis, and other disorders

Should I Get the Flu Shot? CDC Data Raise Concerns

Should I Get the Flu Shot? CDC Data Raise Concerns
In February the CDC revealed that the 2014-2015 influenza vaccine had an efficacy rate of only 19 percent. If that was not bad enough, in June the CDC’s committee that advises on immunization practices announced that nasal spray flu vaccines should not be used in the 2016-2017 flu season because, in the CDC’s own words, “no protective benefit could be measured” from taking them.
Indeed, numerous peer-reviewed scientific studies have shown that the flu vaccine is not effective either at reducing the flu or reducing flu-related deaths.
When a team of researchers at the National Institutes of Health compared flu vaccine rates with influenza-related illness over a 19-year period, from 1980 to 1999, they found that deaths from the flu increased as vaccination rates increased. “In conclusion, the increase in elderly influenza vaccination coverage in the U.S. after 1980 was not accompanied by a decline in influenza-related mortality,” the researchers concluded.
A study, led by a researcher at the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases and published in the journal Archives of Internal Medicine, found that increasing vaccination coverage did not correlate with declining mortality and the decline in influenza-related mortality could not be attributed to the flu vaccine but was rather the result of naturally acquired immunity. Observational studies crediting the flu vaccine with contributing to decreased deaths from the flu, “substantially overestimate vaccination benefit,” these researchers concluded.
A study published in the American Journal of Perinatology of vaccine effectiveness in pregnant women in Northern California across five flu seasons found that women who received flu vaccines during pregnancy had the same risk for influenza-like illness as unvaccinated women, and infants born to women who received flu vaccines also had the same risks for influenza or pneumonia as infants born to unvaccinated women. In other words, vaccine status made no difference to whether or not pregnant women or their offspring got the flu.
A study published in Pediatrics International of Japanese children ages 6 months to 2 years who were vaccinated against the flu found that the influenza vaccine did not reduce the rate of influenza A infections in children under two.

CDC Presents Updated Estimates of Flu Vaccine Effectiveness for the 2014-2015 Season
Flu vaccine did not protect against drifted H3N2 viruses, but protected against vaccine-like H3N2 and B viruses
On February 26, 2015, updated interim influenza (flu) vaccine effectiveness (VE) estimates for the current 2014-2015 season were presented to the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP). The updated VE estimate against influenza A H3N2 viruses was 18% (95% confidence interval (CI): 6%-29%).This result is similar to the VE point estimate of 23%, which was reported in a January 16 Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report (MMWR) and confirms reduced protection against H3N2 viruses this season. The VE estimate against influenza B viruses this season was 45% (95% CI: 14% – 65%).
How well the flu vaccine works can vary depending on a number of factors, including the similarity between circulating influenza viruses and vaccine viruses, and the age, health or immune status of the person vaccinated. The findings for VE against H3N2 viruses this season are about one-third of the VE expected when the flu vaccine is well matched to circulating influenza viruses. The VE against influenza B viruses this season is similar to the effectiveness observed when vaccine viruses and most circulating viruses are well matched.

ACIP votes down use of LAIV for 2016-2017 flu season
Media Statement
For Immediate Release: Wednesday, June 22, 2016
CDC’s Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) today voted that live attenuated influenza vaccine (LAIV), also known as the “nasal spray” flu vaccine, should not be used during the 2016-2017 flu season. ACIP continues to recommend annual flu vaccination, with either the inactivated influenza vaccine (IIV) or recombinant influenza vaccine (RIV), for everyone 6 months and older.
ACIP is a panel of immunization experts that advises the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). This ACIP vote is based on data showing poor or relatively lower effectiveness of LAIV from 2013 through 2016.

The 21st Century Cures Act legislation was originally passed in the house last year on July 10, 2015 as HR 6

The 21st Century Cures Act legislation was originally passed in the house last year on July 10, 2015 as HR 6.
– FDA Fast Tracking of ALL New Vaccines (3091 and 3092)
– Unconscionable Pharma and Vaccine Administrator Liability Shield for Fetal Vaccine Injury or Death Caused by Vaccines Given in Pregnancy (3093)
NVIC issued a press release on July 22, 2015 and Barbara Loe Fisher, NVIC Co-founder and President, released a referenced commentary in opposition to this proposed legislation in which she said,
“The 21st Century Cures Act is a drug company stockholder’s dream and a consumer’s worst nightmare,” said Barbara Loe Fisher, NVIC Co-founder and President. “Making experimental drugs quickly available for the sick and dying, who voluntarily choose to use them, is one thing but Congress should not be greasing the skids to license experimental vaccines that government will recommend and legally require healthy children and adults to use. It is a prescription for disaster.”
After passing the house in 2015, the legislation stalled. Many of the provisions of HR 6 were broken up into several smaller bills, but over the Thanksgiving holiday, the legislation was quickly reassembled into a new version including some sections from HR 6 and adding some new sections, amending them all onto bill HR 34. HR 34 was originally a bill that only addressed “Tsunami Warning, Education, and Research”, but was passed by the US House of Representatives on November 30th as an 824 page monstrosity!

National Vaccine Information Center Says Proposed 21st Century Cures Act Will Endanger the Public Health by Lowering FDA Licensing Standards
WASHINGTON–(EON: Enhanced Online News)–The non-profit National Vaccine Information Center (NVIC) says the proposed 21st Century Cures Act (H.R. 6) will endanger the public health by lowering scientific and informed consent standards used by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to license experimental biological products (vaccines), drugs and medical devices in order to expedite delivery to the U.S. market. Under the proposed law, drug companies could avoid conducting large randomized clinical trials and researchers would be able to test new products on humans without obtaining informed consent.
“if the proposed clinical testing poses no more than minimal risk”
The bill passed the U.S. House of Representatives on July 10, 2015. It mandates that an additional $9 billion be given to National Institutes of Health (NIH) to develop new vaccines and drugs and $550 million be given to the FDA to fast track licensure.
“The 21st Century Cures Act is a drug company stockholder’s dream and a consumer’s worst nightmare,” said Barbara Loe Fisher, NVIC Co-founder and President. “Making experimental drugs quickly available for the sick and dying, who voluntarily choose to use them, is one thing but Congress should not be greasing the skids to license experimental vaccines that government will recommend and legally require healthy children and adults to use. It is a prescription for disaster.”
The proposed law would allow drug companies to use surrogate endpoints to evaluate the effectiveness of experimental vaccines and drugs, and would permit the FDA to accept novel statistical analyses and clinical experience evidence instead of requiring drug companies to produce evidence from large randomized clinical trials. The legislation states that “if the proposed clinical testing poses no more than minimal risk,” informed consent would not be required from test subjects, but it is not clear who decides what constitutes “minimal risk.”
“Informed consent is the gold standard in human experimentation and the practice of ethical medicine, and there is no substitute for the requirement that drug companies conduct large, well designed randomized clinical trials before the FDA licenses a new vaccine,” said Fisher. “Moving numbers around in a computer is a poor substitute for actually proving a new vaccine works and does not kill and injure real human beings before it is recommended and used by millions of people.”

Here Comes the 21st Century Cures Act: Say Goodbye to Vaccine Safety Science

Here comes the 21st Century Cures Act (H.R. 6),7 which is a Pharma-driven bill8 blessed by the FDA9 that seriously compromises the integrity of the FDA drug and vaccine licensing process. 10 The 362-page bill sailed through the U.S. House of Representatives on July 10, 201511 and mandates that about $9 billion dollars be given to NIH to develop more drugs and vaccines and $550 million be given to the FDA to fast track products to market.12
Bill Lowers FDA Licensing Standards
The bill allows the FDA to lower licensing standards for testing of experimental drugs, medical devices and “biological products” – a category that includes vaccines -13 14 15 so companies will no longer be required to conduct large, case controlled clinical trials16 17 18 to evaluate safety and effectiveness. Instead, FDA can accept novel statistical analyses 19 and “clinical experience,”20 such as anecdotal evidence from patients.21
It is interesting that clinical experience and anecdotal evidence will constitute “good science” for the purpose of demonstrating a vaccine is safe before it is licensed, while clinical experience and anecdotal evidence has never been good enough to demonstrate that a vaccine is unsafe after it is licensed.22 23 24 25
Greasing Skids to License Drugs and Vaccines
Sick in bedThe 21st Century Cures Act is being sold as a way for the FDA to quickly license experimental pharmaceutical products for people suffering with rare or life threatening diseases, whether or not those products have been adequately tested.26 However, greasing the FDA licensure skids to make experimental drugs available for the sick and dying, who voluntarily choose to use them, is one thing, while greasing the skids to bum rush experimental vaccines to licensure that government will legally require healthy children and adults to buy and use, is something quite different.27 28 29 30 31
Nearly every single vaccine that the pharmaceutical industry creates and the FDA licenses for child use is eventually recommended for all children and mandated by state governments for daycare and school entry.32 33 34 35 36 And, now, many adults are being brought into the vaccine mandate net as well.37 38 39
Ensuring Drugs & Vaccines Dominate U.S. Health Care
Coming on the heels of the Affordable Health Care Act,40 which guaranteed that the pharmaceutical industry and their products will continue to dominate the most expensive health care system in the world,41 42 43 44 45 46 there are so many breathtaking ways the 21st Century Cures Act will endanger the public health that it is hard to know where to begin. The word “vaccines” is not being publicly uttered by anyone sponsoring the bill. However, the Biotechnology Industry Organization (BIO), which represents more than 1,500 pharmaceutical and other health product corporations, is already crowing about how they managed to influence Capitol Hill politicians to incorporate the “Vaccine Access, Certainty and Innovation Act of 2015” into the 21st Century Cures Act.47 48

TEXT OF H.R. 6, 21 ST CENTURY CURES ACT

Report: Ireland Fights HPV Vaccine Injury & Pharma Control

Report: Ireland Fights HPV Vaccine Injury & Pharma Control
The world is watching as Irish communities have gained public, political and mainstream media traction. Irish families have faced an uphill battle against a pharmaceutical invasion of their healthcare system. Loss of informed consent and medical ethics at the hands of the school system has come between parental rights. HPV vaccine injury from Gardasil & Cervarix is mounting as the country’s medical system plays catch-up to help its injured daughters. Yet acknowledgment within Irish healthcare and politics is still slowed by the crippling pharmaceutical control and conflicts of interest that remains.

R.E.G.R.E.T Ireland’s HPV Vaccine Injury Support Group: regret.ie

Alberta Study: 1 in 10 Girls in ER after HPV Vaccine

Irish Senator Paschal Mooney House of Oireachtas October 2015

Senator Paschal Mooney Questions Irish Health Minister

Kiva Murphy on TV3

Cervical Cancer Vaccine: Is It Safe? TV3 Documentary

Dr. Kevin Kelleher: On Purposely Removing Medical Ethics in Ireland

Anna Cannon Testifies in Irish Parliament Joint Committee on Health & Children

Sin Hang Lee M.D. Open Letter of HPV Vaccine Research Fraud

Flu shot effectiveness for 2015-16 disappointing, data shows

Flu shot effectiveness for 2015-16 disappointing, data shows
Flu shot protects better than last year, but not good enough, experts say
It’s the time of year when experts crunch the numbers to see how well the flu shot worked. The result? Better than last year, but still not good enough.
“Overall, just shy of 45 to 50 per cent,” said Dr. Danuta Skowronski of the BC Centre for Disease Control, who presented the data to the Global Influenza Vaccine Effectiveness meeting at the World Health Organization last week.
“That’s lower than we would like to see, but it’s an improvement over the previous year, because it couldn’t be worse, frankly”
In 2014-15, the flu shot offered essentially zero protection against the circulating influenza virus of that season. Back then, the prevailing strain was H3N2.

A Shot Never Worth Taking: The Flu Vaccine ~ by Kelly Brogan, MD
•It’s not indicated: I’m sure you don’t know a single person who has died of the flu, and if you think you do, I can almost guarantee you that the diagnosis was not confirmed in a way that ruled out the 150-200 infectious pathogens that cause flu-like syndromes, none of which would be “covered” by the vaccine. Despite the astronomical figures the CDC flashes before us of “flu deaths”, there were 18 (yes, 1-8) confirmed in 2001, for example. Access to these figures is suspiciously concealed, but in the end, forget the stats, and use some common sense to see the fear mongering and sales marketing for what it is.
•It doesn’t work: The Cochrane Database – an objective, gold-standard assessment of available evidence has plainly stated, in TWO STUDIES, that there is no data to support efficacy in children under two, and in adults. Even the former Chief Vaccine Officer at the FDA states: “there is no evidence that any influenza vaccine thus far developed is effective in preventing or mitigating any attack of influenza.” Liking the idea of being protected from the flu does not equate to being protected from the flu. That’s essentially what your vaccine-promoting doctor (or pharmacist) is engaging in – promoting an idea.

Study 2010: Vaccines for preventing influenza in healthy adults.
Main results:
The corresponding figures for poor vaccine matching were 2% and 1% (RD 1, 95% CI 0% to 3%). These differences were not likely to be due to chance. Vaccination had a modest effect on time off work and had no effect on hospital admissions or complication rates. Inactivated vaccines caused local harms and an estimated 1.6 additional cases of Guillain-Barré Syndrome per million vaccinations. The harms evidence base is limited.

Study 2014: Vaccines for preventing influenza in healthy adults.
Main results:
On this basis, vaccination shows very limited effects: NNV 92 (95% CI 63 to 201) against ILI in pregnant women and NNV 27 (95% CI 18 to 185) against laboratory-confirmed influenza in newborns from vaccinated women.Live aerosol vaccines have an overall effectiveness corresponding to a NNV 46 (95% CI 29 to 115).The performance of one-dose or two-dose whole virion pandemic vaccines was higher, showing a NNV of 16 (95% CI 14 to 20) against ILI and a NNV of 35 (95% CI 33 to 47) against influenza, while a limited impact on hospitalisation was found (NNV 94, 95% CI 70 to 1022).Vaccination had a modest effect on time off work and had no effect on hospital admissions or complication rates. Inactivated vaccines caused local harms. No evidence of association with serious adverse events was found, but the harms evidence base was limited.The overall risk of bias in the included trials is unclear because it was not possible to assess the real impact of bias.