The Audacity of the “Anti-Vaxxer”

40 years ago, vaccine reactions were almost never discussed. Vaccines were overwhelmingly
believed to have saved humanity from a variety of diseases that had plagued mankind for
generations. Although mistakes had been made, for the most part, “the benefits far outweigh the
negative effects.”

Today, the accepted “wisdom” holds that although severe reactions to vaccines have been
documented, including brain damage and death, they are rare enough that the success of the
vaccine “program” is more important. According to Russell Blaylock, MD:

I reported a conversation coming from the Simpsonwood conference held in Norcross, Georgia,
attended by 53 specialists in vaccine effects—including members of the World Health
Organization and major vaccine manufacturers—concerning data indicating that vaccines were
causing a statistically significant increase in childhood neurodevelopmental problems.

One of the attended stated that his main goal is to see that every child in this country receives his
vaccines, today, tomorrow and forever. In other words, he could care less that the vaccines are
significantly damaging children's brains and altering their brain development.

Russell Blaylock, although a somewhat controversial figure, is known for his work in pioneering
treatments for certain brain tumors, “as well as improving certain operations treating water on
the brain.”

Some of Dr. Blaylock's controversial views include his claim that aspartame may be unsafe even
in small doses and that the H1N1 (swine flu) vaccine may carry more risks than the flu itself.

Blaylock claims that physicians are more regimented than any time in history and that “today
they do what they are told without question.”

Because of this regimentation—this death of creativity—most doctors are completely unprepared

when confronted with potentially vaccine-damaged children and their parents.

Although a popular field in neuroscience, many physicians know very little about excitotoxicity,
the major mechanism in virtually all brain disorders. Blaylock, who wrote a book on the subject,
continues:

Some of the most devastating side effects of vaccines involve neurological damage, including
encephalitis, transverse myelitis, peripheral nerve damage, seizures, mental retardation, language
delays, multiple sclerosis, behavioral problems, and SSPE.

Most physicians, especially pediatricians, think these events are “rare” and must be accepted to
gain the benefit of vaccines. In fact, these adverse vaccine reactions are not as rare as many
believe...medical authorities are using clever ploys to hide and alter the data on vaccine injuries.
They reclassify problems, deny a connection to the vaccines and more often than not, just brush
such reactions off as “normal.” For example, one deception is to classify cases of polio as
“aseptic meningitis.” By doing so, vaccine proponents can give the illusion that the polio vaccine
policy was more successful than it actually was.

An example of this reclassification ploy is the label of sudden infant death syndrome (SIDS). In
a 1982 study, 70% of SIDS cases were shown to follow the DPT vaccination within three weeks.

In order to avoid admitting that the sudden stoppage of breathing by a baby within hours to
weeks of these vaccines was due to the vaccines, the vaccine defenders merely created a new
disease and gave it the incredible name of sudden infant death syndrome, which is like naming it
the “Baby Mysteriously Dies of Anything but a Vaccine Injury Syndrome.”

As is detailed in David Oshinsky's Polio: An American Story, the early creators of the polio
vaccine knew the product was contaminated with an unknown number of viruses, and that at
least 100 million people have been exposed to these viruses.

They also knew that Dr. Bernice Eddy, a microbiologist at the National Institutes of Health, had
proven that the SV40 virus, present in both the killed and live vaccines, caused cancer in
experimental animals. The public was not informed of this contamination until decades later.
Worse, they continued to give the tainted vaccine to children assuming that it would not cause
cancer. Modern science has proven them wrong.

Dr. Blaylock continues by observing that most physicians, even pediatricians, know little about
the brains of young children:

There is evidence that the great number of vaccines given to our children, and adults, is causing
injury to their nervous systems and that it reduces the ability of people to think, learn, behave
and function as normal adults.

It is well known and accepted that when you vaccinate someone, lets say by a shot in the arm,
the body's immune system is thrown into high gear. What is less well known by doctors in
practice, especially by pediatricians, is that it also activates the brain's special immune system.

The central immune cells in the brain are called microglia (they also involve astrocytes). These
normally sleeping immune cells become highly activated when a vaccination is given. Until
activated they remain immobile, but after activation they can move around the brain like an
amoeba, secreting very toxic amounts of inflammatory chemicals (called cytokines) and two
forms of excitotoxins (glutamate and quinolinic acid). This puts the brain in a chronically
inflamed state.

There can also be the risk of vaccine-induced seizures:

Multiple vaccines during a single visit, or combination vaccines, raise the risk even higher.
Seizures following a vaccination are due to two things happening in the brain. One is that many
vaccines can cause a high fever, and this can trigger a seizure in seizure-prone babies, children
and some adults.

It is also known that overstimulation of the immune system, which can occur with certain types
of vaccines and especially when multiple vaccines are given during one office visit, can cause
seizures. The excess activation of the body's immune system leads to overactivation of the brain's
microglia, and the subsequent release of the excitotoxins leads to the seizure. This mechanism
has been carefully worked out in the laboratory—it is not a theory.

Blaylock believes that vaccines can cause seizures even days later and that multiple seizures
indicate a severely inflamed brain and the need for immediate medical attention. These
“seizures” can also be “silent” in that they can be expressed behaviorally, such as periods of
confusion or irritability.

The human brain develops much differently than most animals in that long after birth the brain
still undergoes dramatic formation of its pathways. Much of this formation happens within the
first two years, although it continues until age 25-27.

Excess vaccination disrupts this critical process and can result in a malformed brain, which
manifests as either subtle impairment in thinking, concentration, attention, behavior or language,
or serious problems with these processes.

It has also been shown that excess immune stimulation by vaccination can trigger an interaction
between excitotoxicity and brain inflammatory cytokines that greatly magnifies the damage, and
can do so for decades.
“Adjuvants” are added to many vaccines as well. These are meant to powerfully stimulate the
body's immune system and include toxic metals like aluminum and mercury, animal proteins,
and “special lipids.”

Adjuvants can cause powerful stimulation of the immune system for as long as two years, which
means the brain's immune system also remains overactive.

A growing body of research indicates that overactivity of the brain's immune cells (microglia)
can lead to a gradual loss of brain connections (synapses and dendrites) and can even cause the
brain to be miswired (abnormal pathways development).

Many pediatricians may know very little about the immune system and possible negative effects
from vaccines or combination of vaccines. Dr. Blaylock continues with this damning
pronouncement:

Anyone with even a basic understanding of immunology or having read the available research on
the effects of excessive vaccination on the developing brain, would know that the present
crowded vaccine schedule is extremely destructive to the child's brain. Likewise, there seems to
be little concern as to the effects of multiple immunizations on the developing child's immune
system.

Pediatricians and public health authorities are of the opinion that they can give an unlimited
number of vaccines to babies and small children without risk. Our neuroscience proves this is
insane. Almost every year, these vaccine enthusiasts add another set of vaccines to the schedule,
despite the growing list of neurological and other health disasters occurring in our children.

“Priming” the microglia can increase the damage caused by vaccinations or even natural
infections.

Let's say a newborn is given the hepatitis B vaccine before leaving the hospital. The vaccine
activates the baby's brain microglia (called priming). Then, let's say the child develops an ear
infection. The ear infection once again activates the baby's immune microglia, but this time the
activation is greatly aggravated because of the previous vaccine-induced priming, resulting in a
seizure or even sudden death. The pediatrician will blame it on the ear infection, not the previous
vaccine.

There can be many factors that contribute to tragedies such as SIDS...and it may be premature to
dismiss vaccine reactions as a possible cause.

Another scenario would be a baby who receives a hepatitis B vaccine at birth and then gets his or
her DtaP vaccine within months of birth. Two weeks later, mom finds the baby dead in its crib.
The doctor blames it on SIDS and never reports it to the CDC as a vaccine reaction.

In this case the triple antigen exposure (diphtheria, tetanus and pertussis) triggers the baby's
already primed microglia—this time in the brainstem, where the respiratory control neurons
reside. When the baby is placed on its stomach, it cannot muster enough force to fill its lungs.
Any fumes from the mattress only aggravate the problem.

For the pediatrician, it is easier and safer to blame it on a mysterious disorder called SIDS, than
to admit it was a sequential vaccine reaction.

Another thing that can prime microglia is vaccine adjuvants such as aluminum, mercury and
protein additives. These products easily enter the brain, are stored for decades and can
powerfully activate the brain's microglia, and do so for prolonged periods.

Aluminum is a very powerful inducer of brain microglia, and since aluminum has an immune-
enhancing effect, many manufacturers add aluminum to vaccines. It wasn't until recently that
vaccine authorities started officially acknowledging the danger of the possible toxicity of
aluminum in vaccines.

In addition, injected aluminum can complex with fluoride within the body to produce a
compound, fluoroaluminum, that has a number of harmful effects, including brain injury. There
is some evidence that fluoride can trigger microglia activation and excitotoxicity, which in
combination is particularly injurious to the brain.

In 2001, a new condition was described by Dr. R.K. Gherardi and co-workers that linked muscle
pains and neurological problems with retained aluminum resulting form aluminum hydroxide
vaccine adjuvants. The problem was linked to hepatitis B, hepatitis A or tetanus toxoid vaccines.

A subsequent report found a number of patients with a multiple sclerosis-like illness. In 2004, a
study reported in the journal Neurology found that people exposed to the complete series of
hepatitis B vaccines experienced a 300% higher risk of developing multiple sclerosis than the
unvaccinated public.

The study concludes: “These findings are consistent with the hypothesis that immunization with
the recombinant hepatitis B vaccine is associated with an increased risk of MS, and challenge the
idea that the relation between hepatitis B vaccination and risk of MS is well understood.”

Vaccines can be, and have been, contaminated by bacteria, viruses, viral fragments and
mycoplasma. Once injected, they can enter the brain and continue to prime the brain's microglia
for a lifetime.

Another consideration is the ability of attenuated viruses to undergo mutation over time,
eventually resulting in organisms that can cause new disease. When live viruses are used to make
vaccines, a process of repeated passage of the virus through growth media reduces its virulence,
or the ability of the virus to cause disease.

However, as occurs with measles, rubella and many other viruses used in vaccines, once in the
body the attenuated viruses can be converted to quite virulent viruses. This is thought to explain
the high incidence of Crohn's disease in people who were vaccinated as children with live
measles viruses.
This 2001 study actually found that the mutated measles viruses were different in each tissue,
meaning that a variety of disorders are possible.

The risk of persistent viruses following vaccination with live viruses appears to be growing and
may be secondary to a number of factors, which include the nutritional status of the person and
preexistence of immune suppression. Immunologists have voiced concern that the growing
number of vaccines being given early in life may impair immune function for life.

Another concern is with organisms that contain dozens or more subtypes. Many vaccines will
target only a handful of these subtypes, creating the potential for new subtypes to emerge and
become even more carcinogenic.

For example, HPV (human papilloma virus) has over 100 subtypes, yet the vaccine protects
against only four. The other subtypes that in the past rarely produced disease might be given a
fresh opportunity.

A major issue with the vaccine program is the lack of long-term protection that occurs after you
are naturally infected with a disease. Today, most younger people don't have natural
immunization. In the past, the majority of the population had life-long protection from diseases
like measles, rubella, chickenpox, etc., and this protected mothers and their newborn children as
well. Vaccinated mothers do not offer this protection.

Of great concern is the recent finding that immune activation in pregnant women can have dire
consequences for the developing baby. At one time it was thought that viral infections in the
mother endangered the baby because the virus was passed through the placenta into the baby's
body.

New research demonstrates that it is the mother's immune cytokines that are causing the damage,
once they enter the baby's body, and is not caused by the virus itself.

Researchers found that the eventual effect of maternal immune stimulation depended on the
timing of the immune activation. Activations at mid-term could result in autism; stimulation late
in the pregnancy could result in schizophrenia as the child grows into adulthood.

What this means is that vaccinating a pregnant woman is associated with a high risk of autism,
psychosis and other neurological problems as the baby reaches adolescence or adulthood. This is
being completely ignored by those designing vaccines and making recommendations. At present,
flu, chickenpox, hep B and rubella vaccines are recommended for pregnant women.

HPV vaccination used to be recommended for pregnant women as well, but it caused enough
birth defects and death that this practice ceased.
The Herd Immunity Illusion and Other Scary Scenarios
Perhaps the most oft-cited truism among those who unequivocally defend the current vaccine
program is the notion of “herd immunity.” The idea is that if a large enough percentage of the
population is immunized against a certain disease, then epidemics can be prevented.

Originally, it was suggested that 60-70% of the population needed to be immunized to reach
those goals...today some claim that 95-100% immunization is needed.

There is a very strong, and rarely mentioned, case against the perceived state of “herd immunity”
in the population today. The mistake lies in the assumption that high percentages of the
population are still immune to diphtheria, smallpox, pertussis, etc.

The problem with this is that most of the protection afforded by these childhood vaccines waned
many decades ago, so that most baby boomers, the largest percentage of the population, have no
protection. In fact, vaccines for most Americans declined to non-protective levels within 5 to 10
years of the vaccines.

This means that for a majority of Americans, as well as others in the developed world, herd
immunity doesn't exist and hasn't for over 60 years.

The media and vaccine enthusiasts would have us believe otherwise, like claiming that as many
as 40,000 people die from the “flu” every year, despite this claim being completely unsupported
by the data.

In fact, Peter Doshi, Ph.D., a Johns Hopkins scientist, recently issued a blistering report,
claiming that only a small portion of those diagnosed with the “flu” actually have the influenza
virus present.

Promoting influenza vaccines is one of the most visible and aggressive public health policies in
the United States, says Doshi of the Johns Hopkins School of Medicine. Drug companies and
public officials press for widespread vaccination each fall, offering vaccinations in drugstores
and supermarkets.

The results have been phenomenal. Only 20 years ago, 32 million doses of influenza vaccine
were available in the United States on an annual basis. Today, the total has skyrocketed to 135
million doses. Mandatory vaccination polices have been enacted, often in healthcare facilities,
forcing some people to take the vaccine under threat of losing their jobs.

According to Doshi, “The vaccine may be less beneficial and less safe than has been claimed,
and the threat of influenza seems to be overstated. For most people, and possibly most doctors,
officials need only claim that vaccines save lives, and it is assumed there must be solid research
behind it.” That's not the case, he says.

Although the CDC implies that flu vaccines are safe and there's no need to weigh benefits
against risk, Doshi disagrees. He points to an Australian study that found 1 in every 110 children
under the age of 5 had convulsions following vaccinations in 2009 for H1N1 influenza.
Additional investigations found that the H1N1 vaccine was also associated with a spike in cases
of narcolepsy among adolescents.

Hopefully, the latest Tamiflu debacle will help reignite this crucial conversation.

Another method of the pro-vaccine scare campaign is to evoke mortality rates in the thousands or
millions from previous eras or Third World nations.

If they send out warnings through the media that tens of thousands of infants may die of measles
if children (and adults) are not vaccinated each year, it has a major impact on parental decisions
to vaccinate.

One of the most common themes among proponents of the flu vaccine is that everything must be
done to prevent the 1917-1918 flu epidemic that killed millions.

However, recent research raises serious doubts about blaming a “wild” strain of the influenza
virus for the extraordinary number of deaths. Evidence suggests it was none other than Bayer's
indefatigable promotion of aspirin that may have been largely responsible.

The hypothesis...is that aspirin contributed to the incidence and severity of viral pathology,
bacterial infection, and death, because physicians of the day were unaware that the regimens
(8.0–31.2 g per day) produce levels associated with hyperventilation and pulmonary edema in
33% and 3% of recipients, respectively.

Before the mortality rate spiked, Bayer embarked on an aggressive ad campaign to promote their
new product. Furthermore, autopsy reports from 1918 are consistent with what we know today
about the dangers of aspirin toxicity.

The motivation behind the improper use of aspirin is a cautionary tale, said author Karen Starko,
MD. In 1918, physicians did not fully understand either the dosing or pharmacology of aspirin,
yet they were willing to recommend it. Its use was promoted by the drug industry, endorsed by
doctors wanting to “do something,” and accepted by families and institutions desperate for hope.

Another terrifying epidemic in American history was the 1916 polio outbreak that killed at least
5,000 people. As can be seen by this graph, the 1916 death rate from polio was extremely
anomalous, and was one of the many events that inspired the push to develop a polio vaccine
when rates began rising again in the 1940s and 50s.

Although originally blamed on “Italian immigrants,” this explanation is beginning to be seriously

called into question. A study was published by H.V. Wyatt in 2011 that suggests a much more
sinister explanation for the outbreak:

Previous accounts of the 1916 devastating epidemic have been faulty. The unique features of the
epidemic and its sudden appearance have never been explained.
Three miles from the epicenter of the outbreak, Simon Flexner and his associates at the
Rockefeller Institute at 63rd Street and York Avenue, near Queensborough Bridge on Manhattan
Island, had been passaging spinal cord tissue containing poliovirus, from one Rhesus monkey
spinal cord to another.

I propose that highly virulent virus escaped and caused the epidemic. Scientists, technical and
animal house staff were unaware that they could be infected by poliovirus which could then
infect others.

It seems it would be premature to completely dismiss this hypothesis, especially since an

extremely virulent multi-virus (MV) strain of polio was being experimented on within walking
distance of the worst polio outbreak in half a century. Mortality rates reached 25% among those
afflicted, compared to the usual mortality rate of less than 1%.

These past events and their “official” explanations are extremely important to reanalyze, because
they could potentially be used to mislead the public.
Contamination, Compensation and Corruption
Most young parents don't remember when MMR vaccines didn't exist and when virtually all
children contracted measles, rubella, mumps, chickenpox and pertussis, and as a result they
developed life long immunity.

In a perfect world, no one would suffer and these diseases would be eradicated. However, it
seems we may have put too much trust in the ever-increasing vaccine schedule to achieve this
goal.

The problem was greatly compounded in the U.S. by the 1986 National Childhood Vaccination
Injury Act, which shockingly was meant “to reduce the potential financial liability of vaccine
makers due to vaccine injury claims.”

The National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program was subsequently created “to provide a
federal no-fault system for compensating vaccine-related injuries or death by establishing a claim
procedure involving the United States Court of Federal Claims and special masters.”

In other words, when the vaccine manufacturer makes a mistake, which has happened before and
will happen again, you have to go to a special vaccine court and you aren't even allowed to sue
the manufacturer directly. Many countries other than the U.S. have similar arrangements.

Without the burden of possibly damaging litigation, this seems to remove an absolute incentive
for safety and responsibility on the part of the manufacturers and their product.

One of the reasons that vaccine manufacturers should be held completely accountable is that
contamination of vaccine stocks are disturbingly common, and this includes organisms such as
SIV, mycoplasma, pestivirus, cytomegalovirus and SV40.

SV40 is of particular note, because millions worldwide were exposed to the cancer-causing virus
beginning in 1955 as the result of contaminated polio vaccines. The story behind this tragedy is
quite shocking and a more detailed account is included in the section on polio.

Studies by Michele Carbone and others have demonstrated a profound link between SV40 virus
from vaccines and mesotheliomas and osteosarcomas, as well as numerous types of brain tumors.

Simian virus 40 (SV40) is a DNA virus isolated in 1960 from contaminated polio vaccines, that
induces mesotheliomas, lymphomas, brain and bone tumors, and sarcomas, including
osteosarcomas, in hamsters. These same tumor types have been found to contain SV40 DNA and
proteins in humans.

It appears unlikely that SV40 infection alone is sufficient to cause human malignancy, as we did
not observe an epidemic of cancers following the administration of SV40-contaminated vaccines.
However, it seems possible that SV40 may act as a cofactor in the pathogenesis of some tumors.

One of the most potent cocarcinogens with SV40 is asbestos.

SV40 and asbestos are cocarcinogens in causing mesothelioma in hamster and mice, and in
causing malignant transformation of human primary mesothelial cells in tissue culture. In vitro
and animal experiments showing cocarcinogenicity between SV40 and asbestos support this
hypothesis.

Although many countries quietly banned SV40 once news of the contamination was released in
the 1960's, “an analysis presented at the Vaccine Cell Substrate Conference in 2004 suggested
that vaccines used in the former Soviet bloc countries, China, Japan, and Africa, could have been
contaminated up to 1980.” And according to Carbone's analysis:

The high incidence of SV40 sequences in Italian specimens, for example, is probably linked to
the fact that Italy is the only country in the Western world that used contaminated vaccines as
late as 1999.

Carbone and co-workers also published a study in 1999 claiming that current testing for SV40
was inadequate.

It has also been demonstrated that those infected with SV40 before 1963 have passed the virus to
their offspring (vertical or transplacental transmission).

This is why vaccine proponents continue to cover this disaster up—since knowledge of this mass
contamination of tens of millions of unsuspecting people and future generations would devastate
public trust in government health authorities and the sacrosanct vaccine program.

These fears were given some credibility when the CDC recently removed the SV40 section on
their website.

The CDC has quickly removed a page from their website admitting that more than 98 million
Americans received one or more doses of polio vaccine within an 8-year span when a proportion
of the vaccine was contaminated with a cancer-causing polyomavirus called SV40.

Michele Carbone, Assistant Professor of Pathology at Loyola University in Chicago, has recently
isolated fragments of the SV40 virus in human bone cancers and in a lethal form of lung cancer
called mesothelioma. He found SV40 in 33% of the osteosarcoma bone cancers studied, in 40%
of other bone cancers, and in 60% of the mesothelioma lung cancers.

Dr. Michele Carbone openly acknowledged HIV/AIDS was spread by the hepatitis B vaccine
produced by Merck & Co. during the early 1970s. It was the first time since the initial
transmissions took place in 1972-74, that a leading expert in the field of vaccine manufacturing
and testing has openly admitted the Merck & Co. liability for AIDS.

As for HIV, although much of the population is unaware of the SV40 scandal and its
implications, many do remember the contaminated haemophilia blood products tragedy that saw
thousands of haemophiliacs infected with HIV and hepatitis C in the 1970's and 80's.
Perhaps the most shocking thing about the episode was that the products continued to be sold
even when they were known to be contaminated:

Bayer sparked controversy by continuing to sell contaminated factor VIII after new heat-treated
versions were available. Under FDA pressure, unheated product was pulled from US markets,
but was sold to Asian, Latin American, and some European countries. The product was tainted
with HIV, a concern that had been discussed by Bayer and the FDA.

According to Neil Miller, this level of corruption often extends to the safety studies of the
vaccines themselves.

Vaccine studies are often funded by pharmaceutical companies with a financial interest in the
outcome. Lead authors of important studies that are used to validate the safety or efficacy of a
vaccine are often beholden to the manufacturer in some way. They may own stock in the
company or are paid by the manufacturer to travel around the country promoting their vaccines.

Lead authors may receive consultation fees, grants or other benefits from the drug maker that
contravene ethical boundaries and compromise the integrity of the study. When studies of this
magnitude are jeopardized, generations of people—and society itself—are placed at risk.

In some instances, study results may be preordained...tobacco companies used this very same
ploy. They financed numerous bogus studies ostensibly “proving” that cigarettes didn't cause
cancer. The real studies got lost in the muddle.

At the infamous Simpsonwood conference held in Norcross, Georgia, experts knew that mercury
in vaccines was damaging children. They had irrefutable proof—the very reason for convening
the meeting.

However, instead of making this important information public, they hatched a plan to produce
additional “studies” that denied such a link. In fact, vaccine proponents had the audacity to claim
in some of these papers that mercury in vaccines not only doesn't hurt children but that it actually
benefits them!

Perhaps one of the most important shortcomings of the vast majority of vaccine safety studies is
the absence of the true double-blind study.

Another ploy used by vaccine proponents is to design studies comparing vaccinated people to
other vaccinated people. Honest studies would compare them to an unvaccinated population. In
addition, vaccine control groups rarely receive a true placebo, which should be a harmless
substance.

For example, when the safety profile of a new vaccine is being tested, one group may receive the
experimental vaccine made with aluminum while the “control” group receives an injection of
aluminum as well (rather than water or another harmless substance).
When vaccines are compared in this way, that is, to other substances that are capable of causing
adverse reactions, the vaccine appears safer than it really is. Whenever this deceptive tactic is
utilized, officially acknowledged adverse reactions to a vaccine may represent only a fraction of
the true potential risks to the recipient.

However, not all studies are skewed, for example this 1999 study published by the British
Medical Journal showed a strong correlation between the haemophilus influenzae type b (Hib)
vaccine to rising rates of type 1 diabetes, concluding that “the potential risk of the vaccine
exceeds the potential benefit.”
Risks, Reactions and Revenue
Adverse reactions to vaccines are unacceptably common. Even the FDA admits that FluMist (the
live-virus nasal spray vaccine) can cause pneumonia and “medically significant wheezing.” Neil
Miller reports that “during pre-licensure clinical studies 3% of all children six months to one
year of age who received the vaccine ended up in the hospital with respiratory problems!”

Before this vaccine was approved, a large study conducted in 31 clinics showed that it caused “a
statistically significant increase in asthma or reactive airways disease” in children under five
years of age. Nevertheless, in September 2007 the FDA licensed this vaccine for children as
young as two years old.

With some vaccines, the number of people who experience systemic reactions, such as fever,
headache, respiratory infection, muscle aches, nausea, abdominal pain, diarrhea, chills and
fatigue, is very high.

For example, up to 10% of babies will vomit following their pneumococcal shots. A whopping
62% of 18-55 year-old recipients of the meningococcal vaccine had systemic reactions. Doctors
consider most systemic reactions “normal.”

Common systemic reactions are separate from severe and fatal reactions, including neurological,
immunological and paralytic disorders such as Guillain–Barré syndrome, demyelinating
diseases, arthritis, anaphylactic shock, and other life-threatening conditions.

Vaccine injuries can often be “disguised” by labeling the conditions as learning disabilities,
hyperactivity, mental retardation, attention deficit, etc. Many parents are completely unaware at
how common these adverse reactions can be, let alone that they can occur at all. According to a
study published by Pediatrics, when parents were specifically asked to observe changes in their
baby's behavior after a shot, only 7% reported no reactions at all.

Because of the public's general ignorance of the various types of possible damage that can result
from vaccines, the true number of vaccine injuries may be vastly underreported.

According to this study:

In 1986, Congress passed the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act (PL-99-660) requiring
health care providers to report suspected vaccine reactions to a centralized reporting system. As a
result, the Vaccine Adverse Events Reporting System (VAERS), cosponsored by the Centers for
Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), was
established in 1990.

VAERS is a postmarketing safety surveillance program that collects information about possible
adverse reactions (side effects) that occur after the administration of vaccines licensed for use in
the United States. Current and historic VAERS data are public access, available to health care
providers, vaccine manufacturers, and the general public.
VAERS receives approximately 30,000 reports annually. Since 1990, VAERS has received over
350,000 reports, most of which describe mild side effects, such as fever and local reactions.

About 13% of all reactions are classified as serious, involving life-threatening conditions,
hospitalization, permanent disability, or death. By monitoring such events, VAERS helps to
identify unusual patterns of reports and important safety concerns.

Our findings show a positive correlation between the number of vaccine doses administered and
the percentage of hospitalizations and deaths.

Since vaccines are given to millions of infants annually, it is imperative that health authorities
have scientific data from synergistic toxicity studies on all combinations of vaccines that infants
might receive. Finding ways to increase vaccine safety should be the highest priority.

However, the FDA estimates that 90% of doctors don't even report reactions. Continuing from
the study on VAERS:

Since VAERS is a passive system, it is inherently subject to underreporting. For example, a

confidential study conducted by Connaught Laboratories, a vaccine manufacturer, indicated that
“a fifty-fold underreporting of adverse events” is likely.

According to David Kessler, former commissioner of the FDA, “only about one percent of
serious events [adverse drug reactions] are reported.”

According to Ottaviani et al., “Any case of sudden unexpected death occurring...in infancy,
especially soon after a vaccination, should always undergo a full necropsy study,” otherwise a
true association between vaccination and death may escape detection.

A recent study by Kuhnert et al. demonstrated a 16-fold increase in unexplained sudden

unexpected death after the fourth dose of a penta- (5-in-1) or hexavalent (6-in-1) vaccine.

Similarly, Zinka et al. reported 6 cases of sudden infant death syndrome that occurred within 48
hours following the administration of a hexavalent vaccine. At postmortal examination, these
cases showed “unusual findings in the brain” that appeared compatible with an association
between hexavalent vaccination and sudden infant death syndrome.

These examples provide additional evidence that cases of vaccine-related mortality are likely
underreported in VAERS.

According to Neil Miller, one of the authors of the aforementioned study, the federal government
is aware of the unnecessarily high danger of many vaccines.

In fact, Congress established a “hazard” tax on childhood vaccines. When parents pay the doctor
for requested shots, some of that money goes into a special fund to compensate them when their
children are seriously damaged or die.
As of September 2009, nearly $2 billion was granted for thousands of injuries and deaths caused
by mandated vaccines. Numerous cases are still pending. Awards were issued for permanent
injuries such as learning disabilities, seizure disorders, mental retardations, paralysis, and
numerous deaths, including many that were initially misclassified as sudden infant death
syndrome (SIDS).

Parents need to understand that vaccines are drugs. Each one contains a proprietary blend of
chemicals, pathogens and other foreign matter. That is the nature of a vaccine.

Today, children receive one vaccine at birth, eight vaccines at two months, eight vaccines at four
months, nine vaccines a six months, and twelve additional vaccines between 12 and 18 months
(DtaP and MMR are each given with a single injection but contain three vaccines).

The United States is the most vaccinated country in the world, yet it has a poor infant mortality
rate. One would think that a country with more immunizations, which are explicitly promoted as
life saving, especially for babies, would have an excellent infant death rate...as new vaccines are
added to the recommended vaccine schedule, the US infant mortality rate worsens.

In 1960 (before mass vaccines) the US had one of the best infant mortality rates in the world. By
1998, the US dropped to 28th place. By 2006 [the US] fell to 42nd place, worse than Cuba but
ahead of Croatia.

Interesting that Croatia would be so low on that list as well, as their policy towards vaccinating
infants was made very clear by recent legislation forcing all parents to vaccinate, a disturbing
decision that was even more disturbingly lauded by those who think the vaccine debate is only
about “autism.”

However, Miller is quite clear that vaccination does prevent disease...the tragedy is that greed
and conspiracy have created a system that is becoming increasingly difficult to trust.

If you choose not to vaccinate, there are risks involved. Your child could contract a disease for
which a vaccine has been developed. Your child may also experience complications form this
disease, which could be permanently debilitating or life-threatening, depending on the particular
condition and other factors, such as the child's physical constitution and its ability to reestablish
health.

Not vaccinating is just one risk; vaccinating is another...diseases are described in frightening
detail and their risks exaggerated beyond reality.

With vaccines (and many drugs as well) the “solution” is often developed prior to the marketing
of fear. For example, before the chickenpox vaccine was licensed for general use in 1995,
doctors would encourage parents to expose their children to the disease while they were young.
Doctors recommended this course of action because they knew that chickenpox is relatively
innocuous when contracted prior to the teenage years, but more dangerous in adolescents and
adults.
It wasn't until after the vaccine was licensed that the CDC began warning parents about the
dangers of chickenpox. Many doctors soon stopped encouraging parents to expose their children
and instead receive the shot. The “solution”—a vaccine—preceded the apparent danger.

Vaccine efficacy can be specious.

For example, scientists presume that certain “surrogate markers” or “precancerous lesions”
precede cervical cancer. With the HPV vaccine, they simply compared the numbers of these
markers in women who received the vaccine to the numbers of these markers in women who
received the placebo. However, no actual cases of cervical cancer were prevented in any of the
test subjects in any of the clinical studies of the HPV vaccine.

The HPV vaccine was marketed deceptively as well when first introduced, being promoted as
“100%” effective. However, the vaccine is only “100%” effective against two of numerous
strains of HPV, not cervical cancer itself.

During prelicensure studies, 361 women who received at least one shot of Gardasil went on to
develop precancerous lesions on their cervixes within three years.

According to the report HPV Vaccination – More Answers, More Questions: “cautious approach
may be warranted in light of important unanswered questions about overall vaccine
effectiveness, duration of protection, and adverse effects that may emerge over time.”

In this 2007 report commissioned by the NEJM, two studies were considered on the vaccine's
effectiveness on cervical cancer. The report asked: “In these trials, called Females United to
Unilaterally Reduce Endo/Ectocervical Disease (FUTURE) I and II, what is the efficacy of
vaccination among all subjects, regardless of causal HPV types?”

The results were not promising, as it was determined that in FUTURE I that the vaccine had an
efficacy of only 20%, and this was only against low-risk lesions: “no efficacy was demonstrable
for higher-grade disease, but the trial may have lacked adequate power to detect a difference.”

However, the larger FUTURE II had more conclusive, and even less favorable, results, as the
vaccine was only 17% effective, and again had no impact on preventing high-risk lesions. The
report mentions the obvious shortcomings of the vaccine:

Another factor explaining the modest efficacy of the vaccine is the role of oncogenic HPV types
not included in the vaccine. At least 15 oncogenic HPV types have been identified, so targeting
only 2 types may not have had a great effect on overall rates of preinvasive lesions.

This concept of “strain replacement” is not limited to the HPV vaccine, and is an extremely
important aspect of the vaccine debate that deserves more attention. Miller continues:

Gardasil is not the only vaccine that targets some strains of the disease while excluding others.
The Hib and pneumococcal vaccines were also constructed in this manner, and have become
problematic due to “strain replacement.”
Scientists have discovered that when vaccines only attack some strains of a disease, other strains
gain prominence. The disease becomes more virulent and people who are normally not
susceptible to the ailment are infected.

For example, there are several different types of haemophilus influenzae, including types a, b, c,
d, e, and f. The “b” type is just one strain—the only one for which a vaccine was created—the
Hib shot. Although this vaccine appears to have decreased cases of haemophilus influenzae type
b in children, the overall rate of invasive haemophilus influenzae disease in adults increased.

Researchers don't consider this a failing of the Hib vaccine, rather “it raises the question whether
a [new] vaccine will need to be developed.”

Prevnar, the pneumococcal vaccine, is only designed to protect against a few of the 90 different
strains that can cause the disease. The vaccine is therefore still considered “effective” if the child
is stricken with pneumococcus...just not from one of the strains included in the vaccine.

The Journal of the American Medical Association and the Pediatric Infectious Disease Journal
have both published data demonstrating that non-vaccine strains of pneumococcus are replacing
the strains targeting by the vaccine. What's even more concerning is the new strains are more
dangerous and drug-resistant. According to the study Pediatric Invasive Pneumococcal Disease
in the United States in the Era of Pneumococcal Conjugate Vaccines:

Through the widespread use of PCV7 in the United States, there has been a significant decrease
in the incidence of IPD and nasopharyngeal carriage of vaccine serotypes in all age groups.
However, the emergence of replacement pneumococcal serotypes (e.g., 19A, 1, 5, 15, and 33) is
now having a significant impact on the success of PCV7.

These serotypes have become the most common causes of IPD in infants, children, and adults,
with serotype 19A having emerged as the predominant replacement serotype associated with
multidrug-resistant infections.

Another concern is when vaccines are given to one group with the hope of protecting another
group. Miller explains:

Mass rubella vaccination campaigns were never intended to protect vaccine recipients; the
disease is usually harmless when contracted by children. Instead, the goal has always been to
protect the unborn fetuses of rubella-susceptible pregnant women.

When the hepatitis B vaccine was originally introduced, this same rationale was employed.
Children rarely develop this disease. In the US, less that 1% of all cases occur in persons less
than 15 years of age. The disease is even more uncommon in babies and toddlers. However,
“because a vaccination strategy limited to high-risk individuals has failed,” and since children
are “accessible,” they are compelled to receive the three-shot series beginning at birth.

Some studies show that hepatitis B vaccine recipients lose protective antibodies after 5 to 10
years. The vaccine that babies receive shortly after birth at the hospital will not be effective a few
years later. “By 5 to 15 years after vaccination, some individuals have antibody levels below the
protective threshold—and in some cases even undetectable.”

The necessity for multiple “booster” shots is disturbing. Initially, when a new vaccine is
introduced, a single shot may be recommended, Later, when the artificial immunity wears off,
vaccine manufacturers and the CDC recommend one or more additional shots.

With natural immunity, which is acquired by being exposed to the actual disease, protection is
not meager and temporary, but rather complete and lifelong. The child will rarely contract the
disease again. This is not true with vaccines. Isn't it odd that the vaccine industry's answer to an
ineffective vaccine is to compel more of it?

Another example of the strange logic employed by the media and many vaccine enthusiasts is the
hysteria surrounding blaming those who are unvaccinated when there are outbreaks of disease.

Unvaccinated children are often sent home form school during outbreaks of measles, mumps and
other contagious diseases. Ironically, these children are not sent home for their own protection.
On the contrary, doctors claim that unvaccinated children will spread disease.

Of course, this does not make sense (unless we consider it a veiled confession of vaccine
inefficacy). How is it possible for an unvaccinated child to imperil vaccinated children? If the
shots are effective, then vaccinated children should be protected.

Miller continues by stressing that even members of the U.S. government are aware that the
current vaccine program has many shortcomings, as well as the uncomfortable fact that some
members of the FDA and CDC have extremely suspect financial interests.

Hearings are regularly held to highlight problems with individual vaccines as well as to
investigate the integrity of the vaccine program itself...Members of the exclusive FDA and CDC
committees that are responsible for licensing and recommending vaccines for all children in the
US are permitted to have financial stakes in those vaccines.

For example, in 2000, a congressional hearing before the Committee on Government Reform
was held called Conflicts of Interest in Vaccine Policy Making. The tone of the hearing was set
in the opening statements, when it was announced that they needed to determine if “the entire
process of licensing and recommending vaccines” has been polluted and the public trust has been
violated.

Recent revelations about questionable tactics to approve the first rotavirus vaccine prompted the
hearing. It was suspected that members of the FDA and CDC knew about the dangers of the
rotavirus vaccine before approving it and recommending it for every child in the country.

Dr. Kathryn Edwards, a physician on the FDA's committees that voted to recommend the
vaccine, received $255,000 a year from Wyeth-Lederle, the making of the vaccine. This fact was
also cited in the 2000 congressional hearing.
Dr. Paul Offit, who was on the CDC's committee that recommended the vaccine, also held a
lucrative patent on another rotavirus vaccine under development. “In addition, [Offit] was paid
by the drug industry to travel around the country and teach doctors that vaccines are safe.”

Indeed, even within the last few months, Offit has made appearances on numerous talk shows,
both TV and radio, bemoaning those who dare to question vaccines. The vast majority of the
time he specifically mentions only “autism” and how ignorant the “anti-vaxxers” are for being
afraid of “autism.” Instead of educating, he is continuing to restrict the conversation by
completely omitting all of the concerns outlined so far, among many others.

One of the more striking things revealed by this hearing was with regards to the FDA and CDC
advisory committees that voted to recommend adding the rotavirus vaccine to the childhood
vaccination schedule. A whopping 60% of the FDA advisory committee and 50% of the CDC
committee had financial ties either to the drug company that produced the vaccine or to Merck
and SmithKline Beecham, two other companies developing potentially lucrative rotavirus
vaccines.

During the hearing, Congressman Dan Burton had this to say:

Families need to have confidence that the vaccines that their children take are safe, effective and
very necessary. Doctors need to feel confident that when the FDA licenses a drug, that it's really
safe and that the pharmaceutical industry has not influenced the decision-making process.

Maintaining the highest level of integrity over the entire spectrum of vaccine development and
implementation is essential. No individual who stands to gain financially from the decisions
regarding vaccines that may be mandated for use should be participating in the discussion or
policymaking for vaccines.

One would think, in the face of waning public confidence in the entirety of the vaccine program,
that the FDA and CDC would take the opportunity to agree with such a rational request and
restore the confidence of Congress and the public. Sadly, the response was quite the opposite.

On August 24th, 2000, Reuters Medical News published an article called “Congressional report
slams FDA, CDC policies on disclosing financial conflicts.” The article describes how Linda
Suydam, the senior associate commissioner at the FDA, stated quite unequivocally that “Both the
law and policies allow us to use people who have financial ties.” Both the CDC and the
Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) were also unwilling to make any of the
recommended changes.

The rotavirus vaccine saga continued when a 2006 study was used by the FDA and CDC as a
basis for licensing and recommending a new vaccine called RotaTeq. Neil Miller explains the
obvious conflict of interest:

Authors of the study included Paul Offit and H. Fred Clark, co-owners of the patent on this
vaccine (along with Dr. Stanley Plotkin). In addition, several other members of the study team
who were supposed to be objectively evaluating the safety and efficacy of this vaccine, were paid
consulting fees, lecture fees, and/or provided grant support by Merck, the vaccine manufacturer,
or by GlaxoSmithKline, the maker of another rotavirus vaccine soon to be approved as well.

Some study team members even owned stock in Merck, whose equity value would increase by
positive evaluations of this vaccine. Apparently, such conflicts of interest were deemed irrelevant
to the impartiality required to ensure the integrity of the entire vaccine approval process and the
safety of millions of babies who would soon receive this new vaccine.

The vaccine market is shifting towards adolescents and adults as well. According to a June 17th,
2007 article published by Genetic Engineering and Biotech News, “at present, pediatric vaccines
occupy a higher market share, but this trend will shift towards the adult vaccine segment.”

Naturally, the US is the largest market for vaccines because they are “more profitable than
generic pharmaceutical drugs.”
Birth Control Controversy and Measles Malpractice
One of the more frequent vaccine “conspiracy theories” that gets bandied about (and ridiculed) is
that some vaccines have been nefariously used for anti-fertility purposes, particularly in Third
World nations.

Although this claim is largely unsubstantiated, scientists affiliated with the World Health
Organization did start experimenting with anti-fertility vaccines in the 1970s. Numerous studies
throughout the 80's and 90's documented the progress of these experiments, including:

“Phase 1 clinical trials of a World Health Organization birth control vaccine,” Lancet (June 11th,
1988): 1295-98.

“Vaccines for fertility regulation,” Research in Human Reproduction, Biennial Report: 1986-87
(Geneva: WHO Special Programme of Research, 1988); chapter 11, pp. 177-198.

“Anti-hCG vaccines are in clinical trials.” Scandinavian Journal of Immunology 1992;36:123-

126.

hCG refers to Human chorionic gonadotropin, a hormone that stops menstruation and prepares
the uterus for pregnancy. They theorized that if anti-hCG antibodies could be induced, then
fertilization would remain incomplete.

In the mid 1990s, Human Life International (HLI) became suspicious of a WHO tetanus
vaccination campaign in countries like the Philippines, Mexico and Nicaragua. WHO had
developed a “neonatal tetanus” vaccine and began distributing it in numerous Third World
countries in the early 1990s.

Neonatal tetanus is extremely rare in developing countries, but it continues to be a concern in

Third World regions because of the lack of proper sanitation.

According to J.A. Miller, correspondent for Human Life International (HLI Reports, Human Life
International, Gaithersburg, Maryland; June/July 1995, Volume 13, Number 8):

In October 1994, HLI received a communication from its Mexican affiliate, the Comite' Pro Vida
de Mexico, regarding that country's anti-tetanus campaign. Suspicious of the campaign
protocols, the Comite' obtained several vials of the vaccine and had them analyzed by chemists.
Some of the vials were found to contain human chorionic gonadotrophin (hCG), a naturally
occurring hormone essential for maintaining a pregnancy.

When introduced into the body coupled with a tetanus toxoid carrier, antibodies will be formed
not only against tetanus but also against hCG. In this case the body fails to recognize hCG as a
friend and will produce anti-hCG antibodies. The antibodies will attack subsequent pregnancies
by killing the hCG which naturally sustains a pregnancy; when a woman has sufficient anti-hCG
antibodies in her system, she is rendered incapable of maintaining a pregnancy.
HLI reported the sketchy facts regarding the Mexican tetanus vaccines to its World Council
members and affiliates in more than 60 countries. Soon additional reports of vaccines laced with
hCG hormones began to drift in from the Philippines, where more than 3.4 million women were
recently vaccinated. Similar reports came from Nicaragua, which had conducted its own
vaccination campaign in 1993.

Here are several key points raised by HLI concerning the WHO tetanus vaccination program:

1. Only women between the ages of 15 and 45 were vaccinated (in Nicaragua the age range
was 12-49). Young children and men were excluded.
2. Not only did the vaccines contain human chorionic gonadotrophin (hCG), but the
vaccination protocols called for multiple injections: three within three months and a total
of five altogether. Tetanus vaccinations allegedly provide protection for ten years or
more...why multiple injections?
3. Since the 1970's, WHO has been researching development of an anti-fertility vaccine
utilizing hCG tied to tetanus toxoid as a carrier...the exact same coupling alleged to be
found in the Mexican-Philippine-Nicaragua vaccines.

HLI cites numerous studies, many written by WHO researchers, that document WHO's attempts
to create an anti-fertility vaccine utilizing tetanus toxoid as a carrier. [“Observations on the
antigenicity and clinical effects of a candidate antipregnancy vaccine: B-subunit of human
chorionic gonadotropin linked to tetanus toxoid,” Fertility and Sterility, October 1980, pp. 328-
335.]

Naturally, when reports began surfacing in the Philippines of tetanus toxoid vaccine being laced
with hCG hormones, the WHO and the Philippine Department of Health (DOH) immediately
denied the allegations.

Confronted with the results of laboratory tests which detected its presence in three of the four
vials of tetanus toxoid examined, the WHO and DOH scoffed at the evidence coming from
“right-to-life and Catholic” sources. Four new vials of the tetanus vaccine were submitted by
DOH to St. Luke's (Lutheran) Medical Center in Manila—and all four vials tested positive for
hCG.

From outright denial the stories now shifted to the allegedly “insignificant” quantity of the hCG
present; the volume of hCG present is insufficient to produce anti-hCG antibodies. But new tests
designed to detect the presence of hCG antibodies in the blood sera of women vaccinated with
the tetanus toxoid vaccine were undertaken by Philippine pro-life and Catholic groups.

Of thirty women tested subsequent to receiving tetanus toxoid vaccine, twenty-six tested positive
for high levels of anti-hCG.

Apparently, the WHO and the DOH didn't seriously respond to these results, instead trying to
explain many of the findings as “false positives.” As for why one might use the tetanus vaccine
for such a purpose:
The human body does not attack its own naturally occurring hormone hCG, the body has to be
fooled into treating hCG as an invading enemy in order to develop a successful anti-fertility
vaccine utilizing hCG antibodies. A paper delivered at the 4th International Congress of
Reproductive Immunology (Kiel, West Germany, 26-29 July 1989) spelled it out: “Linkage to a
carrier was done to overcome the immunological tolerance to hCG.”

After the vaccine controversy had reached a fever pitch, a new bombshell exploded; none of the
three different brands of tetanus vaccine being used had ever been licensed for sale and
distribution or registered with the Philippine Bureau of Food and Drugs (BFAD), as required by
law.

The head of the BFAD lamely explained that the companies distributing these brands “did not
apply for registration.” The companies in question are Connaught Laboratories Ltd. and Intervex,
both from Canada, and CSL Laboratories from Australia.

It seemed that the BFAD might belatedly require re-testing, but the idea was quickly rejected
when the Secretary of Health declared that, since the vaccines had been certified by the
WHO...there was assurance enough that the “vaccines come from reputable manufacturers.”

Just how “reputable” one of the manufacturers might be is open to some question. In the mid-
'80s Connaught Laboratories was found to be knowingly distributing vials of AIDS-
contaminated blood products. [“Ottawa got blood tainted by HIV.” Ottawa Citizen, 4 April
1995.]

The HLI report concludes by stating that similar evidence was beginning to emerge from Africa.
Despite the WHO's insistence upon “false positives,” many of the women who were vaccinated
had painful reactions and even abortions.

According to Sr. Pilar Verzosa, the nun who headed the Philippine branch of HLI, the vaccinated
women “started complaining of infected arms and then miscarriages or premature deliveries or
even defective babies.”

Even more disturbing was that the HLI's investigation led them to numerous clandestine groups
such as the World Bank, the Population Council, the Rockefeller Foundation, and the US
National Institute of Health (NIH).

The NIH supplied the hCG hormone in some of the anti-fertility experiments. Moreover, the
vaccine was never even licensed for sale and distribution. Authorities violated several
internationally recognized laws and ethical standards, including the 1947 Nuremberg Code
prohibiting medical experiments on human subjects without their knowledge or consent.

HLI has called for a congressional investigation. Yet, to date no public admission of wrongdoing
or apology has been issued, and few details of this illicit, covert operation ever reached the
general media.
Although it's unlikely that the current tetanus vaccine contains significant amounts of hCG, one
manufacturer warns pregnant women that “animal reproductive studies have not been
conducted.”

Furthermore, “it is also not known whether [the vaccine] can cause fetal harm when administered
to a pregnant woman or can affect reproductive capacity.” To nursing mothers they advise, “It is
not known whether [the vaccine] is excreted in human milk...caution should be exercised when
administered to a nursing woman.”
The EZ-HT Experiment
Another WHO/CDC catastrophe concerns the measles vaccine.

Most infants under five months are protected from measles by maternal antibodies, and standard
measles vaccines are ineffective in babies under nine months. Since measles death rates are
higher in Third World countries, authorities decided to create a “high-titer” vaccine to target this
5-9 month age range.

Beginning in the 1980s, they tested the Edmonston-Zagreb (EZ-HT) strain on Mexican and
Gambian babies 4-6 months old.

The same high-titer vaccine continued to be administered in Guinea-Bissau, Togo, Senegal,

Bangladesh, Haiti, and impoverished minority communities in Los Angeles, California.

The public was told that EZ-HT “produces a better immunological response than standard
vaccines,” but studies had been conducted that concluded the vaccine was unsafe for infants,
including the following: Child mortality after high-titre measles vaccines: prospective study in
Senegal.

The study concluded, quite unequivocally, that “The higher risk of death in the two high-titre
vaccine groups remained significant in multivariate analyses. These findings suggest a need to
reconsider the use of high-titre measles vaccines early in life in less developed countries.”

From 1987 to 1989, scientists set up a research center near 30 remote villages in central Senegal.
Their stated primary objective was to study the clinical efficacy of two high-titer measles
vaccines: Edmonston-Zagreb (EZ-HT) and Schwartz (SW-HT).

Researchers may have suspected the vaccine was dangerous when the results of earlier studies
began to filter in. But they were probably reluctant to abandon their high-titer shot without
testing it at least one more time to be sure. Senegal must have seemed ideal; the region was
extremely remote, and less than 4% of the mothers who “consented” to the study were literate.

When the results were tabulated (using eight statistical procedures) it became clear that children
who received the high-titer measles vaccines had significantly higher mortality rates at 41
months than children in the standard low-titer measles vaccine group.

But they were not dying from measles. Most of the deaths were from other common childhood
diseases. Apparently, the high-titer measles vaccines lowered overall immunity making the
children fatally susceptible to diarrhea, dysentery, malaria, malnutrition, acute respiratory
ailments, and other infectious diseases.

Babies who received SW-HT died at a rate that was 51% higher than those who received the
standard vaccine...nearly 50 excess deaths for every 1000 babies vaccinated. EZ-HT was much
more potent, contributing to a rate that was 80% higher, contributing to 75 excess deaths for
every 1000.
Strikingly, according to the previously cited study published by Lancet in 1991, 1 in every 6
babies vaccinated with EZ-HT died within three years. Unfortunately, even this didn't deter
enthusiasts of the high-titer shot.

Vaccine researchers were unwilling to abandon their deadly Edmonston-Zagreb high-titer

measles vaccine. Instead, they set up a study base in Los Angeles, California. In 1990, three
years after the Senegal study was initiated, the first american Black and Hispanic babies were
injected with EZ-HT. [Awadu, KO. Outrage! How Babies Were Used as Guinea Pigs in an L.A.
County Vaccines Experiment. (Long Beach, CA: Conscious Rasta Press, 1996)]

Even though the WHO and the CDC knew about the high mortality rate already being associated
with the vaccine, they still considered the data “preliminary.”

From 1989 to 1991, Kaiser Permanente along with the L.A. County Department of Health and
the CDC, injected over 700 “mostly minority” babies with unlicensed experimental vaccines
with fraudulently-obtained consent from the parents. Until Los Angeles county, this killer
vaccine had only been used in the “Third World.”

Before the trials finished, nearly 1500 minority babies had been given the experimental vaccine,
according to this 1996 LA Times article:

”A mistake was made,” said Dr. David Satcher, director of the Atlanta-based federal Centers for
Disease Control and Prevention, one of the study sponsors. “It shocked me.” Satcher said in an
interview that the CDC plans to contact all the families involved. He said he was very concerned
that the events not fuel suspicion in the minority community of government-sponsored medical
research.

We now know that the CDC lied about the study on numerous occasions.

1. The “informed consent” form provided to parents violated internationally accepted

ethical codes of conduct regulating human experimentation. Parents were not informed
that EZ-HT was unlicensed in the US.
2. Parents were told that millions of doses of EZ-HT had been used in Europe. But the LA
babies were actually receiving a vaccine that was up to 500 times more potent.
3. The CDC said the communities targeted for the vaccine were those hit hardest by recent
measles outbreaks. According to data obtained from the Los Angeles County Department
of Health, these communities were not the hardest hit. Journalist Keidi Obi Awadu, in his
Outrage!, documented that “three three regions chosen to receive the experimental shots
were predominantly Black and Hispanic.” Furthermore, “several mixed-race and White
communities harder hit by the recent outbreak of measles were not chosen to participate
in the study.”
4. Although the CDC claimed no children were adversely affected, one baby did die from a
rare bacterial disease. According to Awadu, several children “experienced what parents
are describing as long-term immune system impairment, seizures and other acute
conditions consistent with vaccine-induced injury.”
 5. Stephen Hadler of the CDC claimed the babies died in earlier studies because they didn't
have access to adequate health care. However, one of the more important findings of the
Senegal study was “the three vaccine groups were comparable as regards various social,
family, and health characteristics. Intensive medical care was provided during the
project.”

In 1990, WHO requested 250 million doses of the deadly EZ-HT measles vaccine to be
dispensed throughout the world. However, data from Guinea-Bissau, Senegal, and Haiti
continued to confirm that EZ-HT doesn't save lives—it increases mortality. By June of 1992, the
link was irrefutable; WHO called for a moratorium on use of the disputed vaccine. By some
estimates, this may have prevented 18 million baby deaths. [Awadu]
The Chickenpox/Shingles Charade
Vaccines have been introduced to counteract problems caused by old vaccines. The chickenpox
vaccine contributed to a herpes zoster (shingles) epidemic that may last for more than 50 years.

Herpes zoster (HZ) is a reactivation of varicella zoster, the chickenpox virus, and only affects
those previously infected with chickenpox. Although most people recover completely from
chickenpox, the virus never leaves the body, and especially as people age, the virus can become
active again and reappear as “shingles.”

Shingles appears as a painful rash or group of blisters on one side of the body, and usually lasts
for two to four weeks. Although shingles usually resolves on its own without intervention, some
treatments exist to reduce the duration of the symptoms, as well as to prevent a possible severe
complication known as postherpetic neuralgia.

Although you can't “catch” shingles from someone who is infected, you can come down with
chickenpox if you've never had it before. Also, shingles is much more common in those over 50.

It was previously thought that the weaker immune systems of the elderly contributed to this
higher rate of shingles, but recent evidence indicates that it's more likely because they have less
contact with children affected with chickenpox.

When most adults (who have already had chickenpox) come into contact with children infected
with the virus, their immunity is naturally and asymptomatically boosted, protecting them from
shingles.

According to this study, “The peculiar age distribution of zoster may in part reflect the frequency
with which the different age groups encounter cases of varicella.” Attacks of zoster are
postponed when these periodic encounters occur. Also, even the CDC acknowledges that those
who have been vaccinated against chickenpox are still susceptible to shingles.

Before widespread use of the chickenpox vaccine, there were estimated to be 500,000 shingles
cases in the US each year. During the period of increasing varicella vaccination, beginning in
1998, HZ among adults increased by 90%.

According to a 2004 CDC report, the number of shingles cases in 2002 was 33% than in 2001
and 56% than 2000. This study, a review of the US universal varicella vaccination program,
stated the problem quite clearly:

HZ morbidity costs have exceeded the cost savings from varicella-disease reductions. Universal
varicella vaccination has not proven to be cost-effective as increased HZ morbidity has
disproportionately offset cost savings associated with reductions in varicella disease. Universal
varicella vaccination has failed to provide long-term protection from VZV disease.

Neil Miller summarizes the predicament:

Apparently, there is a societal benefit when chickenpox remains endemic. When the wild-type
varicella virus is permitted to circulate naturally throughout society, adults receive beneficial
periodic exposures to the virus boosting their immune systems and helping to suppress the
reactivation of herpes zoster.

However, as more and more children are vaccinated with the synthetic or manufactured
chickenpox virus, the natural virus becomes less pervasive and there are fewer opportunities for
adults to receive these periodic boosts. This has led to much higher rates of shingles in
Americans.

The FDA, CDC and vaccine manufacturers “traded” chickenpox, a relatively mild childhood
disease, for a much more serious ailment that affects adults. Studies have shown the cost alone
for this mistake may be astronomical:

We estimate universal varicella vaccination has the impact of an additional 14.6 million (42%)
HZ cases among adults aged <50 years during a 50 year time span at a substantial cost burden of
4.1 billion US dollars or 80 million US dollars annually utilizing an estimated mean healthcare
provider cost of 280 US dollars per HZ case.

Dr. Gary Goldman, an expert on the varicella virus, was hired in 1995 by the CDC to monitor the
new chickenpox vaccine. According to Goldman:

Due to the universal varicella vaccination program whereby every healthy child is vaccinated at
age 12 months, there are no longer the seasonal outbreaks of varicella that occurred in schools
and communities. These annuals outbreaks and exposures (called exogenous exposures) played a
significant role in boosting cell-mediated immunity to help suppress the reactivation of herpes
zoster among children and adults who had a previous history of natural or wild-type varicella.

Goldman continues:

The universal varicella vaccination program in the US...will leave our population vulnerable to
shingles epidemics...there appears to be no way to avoid a mass epidemic of shingles lasting as
long as several generations among adults.

According to Goldman, the CDC is more than aware about the problem, and that when he
approached them with his concerns, they replied that “any possible shingles epidemic associated
with the chickenpox vaccine can be offset by treating adults with a shingles vaccine.”

By 2006, the FDA had licensed Zostavax, a vaccine designed to reduce the risk of shingles.
Incredibly, Merck, the same company that makes Varivax (the chickenpox vaccine), is also
manufacturing Zostavax. Such an apparent conflict of interest is accepted without question, even
though the very “success” of Varivax is contributing to the need for yet another product.

As a result of Goldman's research, it's quite clear how dangerous it is to create new vaccines to
treat problems caused by old vaccines. He asserts:
The shingles vaccine serves as a vaccine to offset the initial deleterious effects associated with
the similar and related varicella vaccine. It will be difficult to replicate the protection against
shingles that existed naturally in the community when incidence of chickenpox was high.

Using a shingles vaccine to control shingles epidemics in adults would likely fail because adult
vaccination programs have rarely proved successful. There appears to be no way to avoid a mass
epidemic of shingles lasting as long as several generations among adults.

As for the vaccine's effectiveness when first released, even according to Merck, Zostavax was
only 51% effective at “reducing the risk” of developing HZ in those aged 60-69. Efficacy drops
to 41% in those 70-79, and is merely 18% above 80.

Several conflicts of interest also surround Merck and the HZ vaccine. Merck participated in the
organization of oversight activities and monitored the progress of the primary study used to
justify licensing the vaccine.

Several authors of the study received consultation fees, lecture fees, or honoraria from Merck.
Others received grant support from Merck or owned stock in Merck—all while concurrently
overseeing important aspects of the study requiring complete objectivity. Two of the researchers
were actively involved in this study while having “partial interests in relevant patents.” Still
others were employees of Merck.

A member of the CDC's Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP), Dr. William
Schaffner, even received financial payment from Merck to discuss Zostavax with reporters. Neil
Miller notes how this truly should be considered unacceptable:

This questionable practice lowers public confidence in the high ethical standards that should be
required and are expected from the custodians of our healthcare system. It also encourages public
cynicism towards media coverage of all vaccine-related news.

How can we trust any claim pertaining to vaccine safety and efficacy when custodians of our
healthcare system are receiving money from the drug companies they are commissioned to
oversee? A functional system of healthcare checks and balances is imperative.
Smallpox Shenanigans
Smallpox is caused by the variola virus. You can catch smallpox through infected blankets or
clothing, or by inhaling droplets discharged from the nose and mouth of an infected person.

Within 12 days after exposure, those infected will experience fever, nausea, vomiting, headache,
backache, and muscle pains. This is soon followed by severe abdominal pain and a subsequent
rash develops on the entire body. The rash then transforms into pus-filled sores which eventually
crust over and may leave scars. The disease almost always confers permanent immunity.

There are different forms of smallpox (variola major, variola minor, fulminating, malignant,
modified, etc.) and some are more serious than others. According to the WHO, case-fatality rate
can reach 20% or higher. By 1980 the WHO declared that smallpox had been eradicated.

Although the WHO was quick to give credit to their own worldwide vaccination campaign begun
in 1967, variola had already stopped infecting people in more than 8 out of 10 countries
throughout the world. At that time, only 131,000 cases of smallpox were reported. According to
Neil Miller:

Some medical historians question the validity of [the WHO's] claim. Scarlet fever and the plague
also infected millions of people. Vaccines were never developed for these diseases yet they
disappeared as well. Several reputable historians credit multiple public health activities—
sanitation and nutrition reforms—with reducing the incidence and severity of the early
problematic diseases, including smallpox, scarlet fever, dysentery, typhoid, and cholera.

The history of smallpox inoculations is important to get an understanding of the history of

vaccination, and not just because this story explains how the word “vaccine” was derived.

By the 1700s, it was known that contracting smallpox would give you immunity later in life.
Some doctors even intentionally exposed people to smallpox hoping to provoke a less severe
reaction and still confer immunity. Children were even exposed to pus extracted from “mild”
cases of smallpox, a technique known as variolation.

In 1715, Peter Kennedy suggested collecting smallpox fluid and introducing it to the patient
through a scratch in the skin. This technique would become the model for future applications and
research.

It quickly became customary for the upper and middle classes to submit to the procedure. But it
was an uncertain and hazardous practice. Often, smallpox by variolation was indistinguishable
from an attack of ordinary smallpox. Moreover, it rarely conferred permanent immunity; the
variolated could contract the disease more than once.

The trouble and risks of variolation were disliked and feared but were accepted in the name of
duty. The variolated often died from the procedure, became the source of a new epidemic, or
developed other illnesses from the lymph of the donor, such as syphilis hepatitis or tuberculosis.
Variolation spread throughout England, Europe, Canada, and the American colonies. However,
the primary side effect of the procedure was smallpox itself. This caused researchers to seek
alternatives to the dangerous and uncertain medical technique.

In 1774, Benjamin Jesty set out to prove that cowpox infection protected against smallpox.
Apparently, there was a rumor in England among 18th century dairymaids that when you catch
cowpox, a relatively harmless disease, you would become immune to smallpox.

Jesty took diseased matter from cows and “vaccinated” his wife and sons (cowpox is also
referred to as the vaccinia virus). Supposedly, no one in his family contracted smallpox during
later epidemics, although his wife almost lost her arm as the result of a severe inflammation,
rousing the ire of his peers for experimenting on his own family.

Enter Edward Jenner, an English physician whose work Wikipedia dubiously refers to as having
“saved more lives than the work any other human.” Apparently, no credit is due to the 18th
century milkmaids, or even Jesty, who “unlike Edward Jenner, a medical doctor who is given
broad credit for developing the smallpox vaccine in 1796, did not publicize his findings made
some twenty years earlier in 1774.”

Jenner made a deliberate cut on James Phipps, a healthy 8-year-old boy, and inserted cowpox
matter into the open wound. The boy caught cowpox. Seven weeks later, Jenner injected
smallpox matter into the boy and claimed he was immune to the disease.

Jenner's medical colleagues disputed his claim that cowpox protected against smallpox: “We
know that it is untrue, for we know dairymaids who have had cowpox and afterwards had
smallpox.” [White, W. The Story of a Great Delusion: In a Series of Matter-of-Fact Chapters
(London: EW. Allen, 1885): xi.]

Soon thereafter, even Jenner admitted: “There were were not wanting instances to prove that
when the cowpox broke out among the cattle at a dairy, a person who had milked an infected
animal and had thereby apparently gone through the disease in common with other, was liable to
receive the smallpox afterwards.” [Harding Rains, AJ. Edward Jenner and Vaccination (East
Hussex, England: Wayland Publishers, 1974):59]

Despite facing a good deal of opposition, Edward Jenner continued his experiments and in 1798
he published his Inquiry into the Causes and Effects of the Variolae Vaccinae, a “vulgar treatise”
on horsegrease cowpox.

He knew of men who milked cows soon after dressing the heels of horses afflicted with “the
grease,” an oily and detestable horse disease. Jenner now insisted that these men were immune to
smallpox, and that children would forever be protected from the disease if they were injected
with cowpox after the cow was infected with the rancid secretions from horses' heels. J

Jenner published Inquiry in order to recommend horsegrease cowpox. He carefully discriminated

it from plain cowpox, which, he admitted, had no protective virtue.
The public was appalled by Jenner's recommendations. Still, many attempts were made to verify
Jenner's prescription for protecting children; every experiment ended in failure. Jenner's peers
were pleased to learn of his failures. One commented: “The very name of horsegrease was like to
have damned the whole practice of vaccinations.”

This may have been why, in 1806, when the esteemed Dr. Robert Willan published On Vaccine
Inoculation, a treatise on the most recent developments in the field, Jenner was freely cited, yet
neither horsegrease nor horsegrease cowpox was ever mentioned. Instead, plain cowpox was
exalted as the true prophylactic.

Jenner continued to promote his nauseating treatment and as a result of his petitions to the House
of Commons in 1802 and 1807, mass inoculation campaigns began.

Soon thereafter cases of smallpox among the vaccinated were reported. At first they were denied.
When denial was no longer possible—because the vaccinated were obviously afflicted with the
disease—Jenner and his supporters claimed that if vaccination did not prevent smallpox, it at
least provoked milder forms of the disease.

But when the vaccinated caught the disease and died, new explanations became necessary. These
deaths were attributed to “spurious” cowpox. [Miller, G., ed., *To Doctor Alexander J.G.
Marcet, London, 11 November 1801, Letters of Edward Jenner and Other Documents concerning
the Early History of Vaccination (London, England: The Johns Hopkins Press, 1983):13]

Jenner explained that “the disease produced upon the cows by the colt and from thence conveyed
to those who milked them was the true and not the spurious cowpox.” According to Jenner,
protection from smallpox is not possible “until a disease has been generated by the morbid
matter from the horse on the nipple of the cow, and passed through that medium to the human
subject.”

However, it was virtually impossible to discriminate between the apparently different forms of
cowpox. Thus, when the vaccinated recovered from the ordeal, Jenner claimed the cowpox was
genuine; otherwise it was spurious!

Wikipedia's bold statement seems to be losing some of its bite, for Jenner even admitted that his
“gift” caused disease and death: “The happy effects of inoculation...not very unfrequently
produces deformity of the skin, and sometimes, under the best management, proves fatal.” He
tried to blame the failures on improper inoculations, an excuse that would continue to be used in
the years following his death in 1823.

By that time, three kinds of smallpox vaccination were being used, cowpox (promoted as “pure
lymph from the calf”), horsepox (known as “the true and genuine life-preserving fluid”) and
horsegrease cowpox, the “foul concoction” promoted in Jenner's Inquiry. All were known to
cause disease and death.
After Jenner's deaths, vaccine failures continued to be blamed on improperly administered
inoculations. Soon, two or more punctures were recommended, with some doctors claiming that
a “good vaccination” required four punctures.

Even though there is no evidence that the number of puncture marks influenced the success of
the practice, medical authorities at the time suggested that people be vaccinated again and again
“until vesicles cease to respond to the insertion of the virus.” [White, W., pg. xxiii.]
Strain Replacement & Pathogen Evolution
Ideally, vaccines would provide perfect protection that lasts forever. However, vaccines are
imperfect; they confer incomplete immunity.

Mounting evidence indicates that vaccines designed to reduce the growth rate of pathogens
within their hosts produce conditions that actually increase pathogen virulence, ultimately
preventing eradication of the disease.

Disease-causing organisms strive to maximally infect their hosts without killing them. Vaccines
induce the targeted pathogen to adapt and evolve in unintended ways, creating undesirable
disease outcomes in individuals and entire host populations.

Herd immunity may never be achieved as vaccination rates impel the pathogen family to avoid
extinction by enhancing its hostile nature as it adapts to its new environment:

This evolution can erode any population-wide benefits such that overall mortality rates are
unaffected, or even increase, with the level of vaccination coverage.

We find that the use of either anti-growth or anti-transmission vaccines leads to the evolution of
pathogens with an increased within-host growth rate; infection of unvaccinated hosts with such
evolved pathogens results in high host mortality.

The emergence and spread of mutant pathogens that evade the effects of prophylactic
interventions, including vaccines, threatens our ability to control infectious diseases globally.

Vaccines that reduce pathogen replication may select for more virulent pathogens, eroding the
benefits of vaccination and putting the unvaccinated at greater risk.

The control of some childhood diseases has proven to be difficult even in countries that maintain
high vaccination coverage. This may be due to the use of imperfect vaccines and there has been
much discussion on the different modes by which vaccines might fail.

Immunity has been shown to promote virulence:

[Vaccination] accelerated the rate of virulence evolution, rendering parasites more dangerous to
naïve hosts. These results argue for further consideration of the evolutionary consequences for
pathogen virulence of vaccination.

Vaccines that target some but not all strains of a disease can induce the emergence of other
strains that become more prominent as they replace previous ones.

Often, the new strains are more virulent and may infect age groups normally unaffected by the
disease.

Haemophilus influenzae
A vaccine targeting the “b” strain of Haemophilus influenzae was recommended for infants in
1991. Mass vaccinations against Hib increased deadly infections caused by the “a” strain and
other non-b strains.

Adults and the elderly have also become more susceptible to invasive Haemophilus influenzae
disease following Hib vaccinations of children:

After the introduction of Hib immunization in children, invasive Hib infections in unimmunized
adults also declined, but the overall rate of invasive Hi disease in adults increased.

Specifically, deadly infections from Haemophilus influenzae type “a” have increased, turning it
into a “major invasive bacterial disease.”

In addition, the incidence of Hia meningitis increased 8-fold within one year after a vaccination
program against Hib was initiated.

Several of the new strains are severe. More than one-third of Hif cases and one-fifth of the non-
typeable cases require intensive care:

The clinical burden of invasive non-type “b” H. influenzae disease, measured as days of
hospitalization/100,000 individuals at risk and year, increased significantly throughout the study
period.

Vaccination against Hib has altered the epidemiology of invasive Haemophilus influenzae
infections. Prior to infant vaccination against Hib, 65% of all Haemophilus influenzae cases were
caused by the “b” strain. Now, 84% of all cases are now caused by the “f” strain and other non-b
strains.

Since the introduction of the Hib vaccine, there have been more fatal cases of non-Hib infections
in the elderly:

The epidemiological characteristics of invasive H. influenzae disease have changed from a

disease that predominantly affects children and is dominated by type b to a disease that
predominantly affects adults and is dominated by non-typeable strains.

The increased cases of virulent non-b Haemophilus influenzae among adults could be caused by
the loss of cross-immunity that was provided by natural exposure to Hib or from changes in the
organisms.

Invasive non-b strains of Haemophilus influenzae are more virulent, causing severe disease in the
pediatric population. These non-typeable strains are resistant to antibiotics.

Pneumococcal disease
The Streptococcus pneumoniae pathogen has more than 90 different strains. In 2000, a vaccine
that targeted 7 of these strains was recommended for infants. In 2010, a new vaccine was
introduced that targeted 13 pneumococcal strains.

Pneumococcal disease rates initially declined following the vaccine's release, but then increased
when non-vaccine strains quickly replaced strains targeted by the vaccine. Many of these new
strains are highly virulent and resistant to antibiotics.

Pneumococcal vaccination of children also significantly increased the risk of the disease in
adults. Vaccine-induced pneumococcal strains are now a worldwide problem, posing a threat to
the long-term effectiveness of pneumococcal vaccination.

Cases of invasive pneumococcal disease in adults have increased significantly:

Gains in disease reduction were offset by increases in replacement serotypes, particularly among
the over-65 age group.

Although the vaccine was effective against some strains, “the emergence of replacement
nonvaccine pneumococcal serotypes has resulted in an increase in the incidence of serious and
invasive infections.”

The increase in carriage of non-vaccine serotypes, and the consequent increase in invasive
disease, could reduce, negate or outweigh the benefit.

Adults are especially at risk of invasive pneumococcal disease caused by vaccine-induced

replacement serotypes, but infants have been affected as well.

There is evidence that antibiotic-resistant strains of invasive pneumococcal disease have arisen
from recombinations of vaccine and non-vaccine strains.

Due to strain replacement, the overall pneumococcal rate hasn't changed. Also, the new vaccine
that targets 13 strains “did not affect the rate of overall pneumococcal colonization.”

The pneumococcal conjugate vaccines (PCVs) that are currently in use only protect against some
serotypes of the bacterium, and there is now strong evidence that those serotypes not included in
the vaccine increase in prevalence among most vaccinated populations.

Just two years after PCV13 was introduced, 94% of all pneumococcal strains in healthy children
were non-vaccine targeted serotypes. PCV13 is expected to induce strain replacement like that
seen with PCV7.

Strain replacement is inevitable when vaccines only target some of the many strains that are in
competition with each other.
To bolster their claim that smallpox inoculations were safe and effective, vaccine proponents
often resorted to medical ploys. Hospital records were consistently “doctored.” For example,
smallpox victims who were previously vaccinated and required hospital services were frequently
registered as unvaccinated.

According to Dr. Russell of the Glasgow Hospital, “Patients entered as unvaccinated showed
excellent marks (vaccination scars) when detained for convalescence.” Vaccinated patients who
died from either smallpox or the smallpox injection were often certified as unvaccinated as well,
or had their death certificates falsified.

For example, according to Dr. Herbert Snow, senior staff surgeon of the London Cancer
Hospital, “Of recent years, many men and women in prime of life have dropped dead suddenly. I
am convinced that some 80% of these deaths are caused by the inoculations or vaccinations they
have earlier undergone. The coroner always hushes it up as 'natural causes.' I have been trying to
get these case referred to an independent commission of inquiry, but so far, in vain.” [McBean,
E. The Poisoned Needle (Mokelumne Hill, CA: Health Research, 1957)]

Even the renowned playwright George Bernard Shaw was aware of the medical shenanigans
used to hoodwink the public: “During the last epidemic at the turn of the century, I was a
member of the Health Committee of London Borough Council. I learned how the credit of
vaccination is kept up statistically by diagnosing all the re-vaccinated cases as pustular eczema,
varioloid or whatnot—except smallpox.” [Ibid., pg. 64]

By around 1850, several countries had enacted compulsory vaccination laws, including Bavaria,
Denmark and England.

Prior to compulsory vaccine legislation, smallpox outbreaks were regional and self-limiting. The
most severe epidemics occurred following mandatory shots.

In England, from 1870 to 1872, after more than 15 years of forced immunizations—and a 98%
vaccination rate—the largest epidemic of smallpox ever recorded maimed and killed thousands
of people. Most of the population had been vaccinated and re-vaccinated. [Allen, H. Don't Get
Stuck! The Case Against Vaccinations and Injections (Tampa, Florida: Natural Hygiene Press,
1975):32]

Dr. William Farr, Compiler of Statistics of the Registrar-General, London, noted that “Smallpox
attained its maximum mortality after vaccination was introduced. The mean annual mortality to
10,000 population from 1850 to 1869 was at the rate of 2.04, whereas in 1871 the death rate was
10.24 and in 1872 the death rate was 8.33, and this after the most laudable efforts to extend
vaccination by legislative enactments.” [McBean, E., pg. 27]

According to Sir Thomas chambers, a London health official: “Of the 155 persons admitted to
the Smallpox hospital in the Parish of St. James, Piccadilly, 145 had been vaccinated.” At
Marylevore hospital, 92% of the smallpox cases had been vaccinated. In 1871, officials at
Highgate Hospital admitted that 92% had been vaccinated as well.
Figures were similar in many other countries where compulsory laws were established. For
example, in 1870 and 1871 more than one million Germans contracted smallpox after Germany
enforced mandatory shots; thousands died. 96% of the victims were vaccinated. [Ibid., pg. 13]

The German Chancellor himself opined, “The hopes placed in the efficacy of the cowpox virus
as a preventative of smallpox have proved entirely deceptive.”

From 1887 to 1889, countless Italian citizens contracted smallpox after Italy enforced mandatory
shots; thousands died. According to Dr. Charles Dauta, Professor of Hygiene and Materia
Medica at the University of Perugia, “Italy is one of the best vaccinated countries in the
world....For 20 years before 1885, our nation was vaccinated in the proportion of 98.5%....The
epidemics of smallpox that we have had [from 1887 to 1889] have been so frightful that nothing
before the invention of vaccination could equal them.” [“Vaccination in Italy,” NY Med J (July
22, 1899)]

Over a twenty year period beginning in 1886, thousands of Japanese citizens died and hundreds
of thousands were infected with smallpox after Japan enforced mandatory shots every five years.
[Shelton, HM. Vaccine and Serum Evils (San Antonio Texas; Health research, 1966):20-21]

In 1918 and 1919, after the US took control of the Philippines, mandatory smallpox vaccination
was enforced. Thousands died after the entire population was vaccinated. A 1920 Report of the
Philippines Health Services declared, “The 1918 epidemic looks prima facie as a flagrant failure
of the classic immunization.” [Ibid., pg. 22]

Once the connection between mass vaccination and the increase in epidemic became more
apparent, several countries rescinded the mandatory vaccination laws and even outlawed the
practice completely.

The Secretary of the Governing Board in Dublin, Ireland, declared, “Smallpox virus taken from
the calf would communicate that disease to the human subject and be thereby a fertile source of
propagating the disease, and would, moreover, render the operator liable to prosecution under the
Act prohibiting inoculation with smallpox.” [White, W., pg. xxi.]

Australia abolished compulsory vaccinations in the late 1800's, and proceeded to report only 3
cases of smallpox in 15 years. Statistics from England and Wales show an inverse correlation
between the percentage of babies vaccinated and the number of smallpox deaths: the greater the
number vaccinated, the greater the loss. Deaths from smallpox tumbled after people refused the
vaccine. [Official statistics from England and Wales, as reported by Shelton, HM., pg. 22]

By the mid-1850's, a very large anti-vaccine movement had been established. After the 1870-
1872 smallpox epidemic, thought to have been caused by mandatory shots, this movement
gained credibility and became more organized in its efforts to resist compulsory laws and
awaken others to the inherent dangers of smallpox vaccinations.
In 1878, Mary Catherine Hume published 150 Reasons for Disobeying the Vaccination Law by
Persons Prosecuted Under It. Parents were being fined a jailed for refusing to submit their
children to the shots.

Before the Exemption Act was passed in 1907, every year thousands of parents were prosecuted
for resisting vaccination. Many had their homes and property confiscated. Hume's book
advocated civil disobedience despite the punitive efforts of pro-vaccinators.

In 1884, a massive collection of smallpox data was published by the London Society for the
Abolition of Compulsory Vaccination, containing “unbiased vaccine statistics, newspaper stories
about people who were damaged by the shot, and legal briefs regarding compulsory laws.”

Despite harsh laws, many people refused to be vaccinated and would not allow their children to
receive the shots. According to Lord Bramwell, “It is a most mischievous thing that there should
be a law in existence which good people are tempted to disobey. It is a bad example to set, and it
tends to bring laws into contempt which are of real importance.”

Even Mahatma Gandhi, although by no means a scientist, would eventually weigh in on the
vaccine debate: “I am and have been for years, a confirmed anti-vaccinationist...I have not the
least doubt in my mind that vaccination is a filthy process that is harmful in the end.” [Gandhi,
MK. Gandhi an Autobiography: Story of My Experiments With Truth (Boston: Beacon PR.,
1957)]

The following quotes are from late 18th and early 19th doctors and other health officials who
were very vocally skeptical of the claims of the proponents of the smallpox vaccine. They are
taken from these sources: Fatality Rates of Small-Pox in the Vaccinated and Unvaccinated by
R.P. Garrow, Fatality Rates of Small-Pox in the Vaccinated and Unvaccinated by L.A. Parry,
New York Press, (January 26th, 1909), and McBean, E., pp. 21-24; 42, 72.

Vaccination does not stay the spread of smallpox, nor even modify it in those who get it after
vaccination. It does introduce in the system contamination and, therefore, contributes to the
spread of tuberculosis, cancer, and even leprosy. It tends to make more virulent epidemics and to
make them more extensive.

—Dr. Walter M. James, Philadelphia practitioner

I have studied the question of vaccination conscientiously for 45 years. As for vaccination as a
preventative of disease, there is not a scrap of evidence in its favor. The injection of virus into
the pure bloodstream of the people does not prevent smallpox; rather, it tends to increase its
epidemics and it makes the disease more deadly.

—Dr. Charles E. Page, Boston practitioner

Cancer was practically unknown until cowpox vaccination began to be introduced. I have had to
do with 200 cases of cancer and I never saw a case of cancer in an unvaccinated person. -Dr. W.
B. Clark, New York practitioner
Abolish vaccination and you will cut the cancer death rate in half.

—Dr. F. P. Millard, Toronto practitioner

I am convinced that the increase of cancer is due to vaccination.

—Dr. F. Laurie, Medical Director of the Metropolitan Cancer Hospital, London

It is my firm conviction that vaccination has been a curse instead of a blessing to the race. Every
physician knows that cutaneous diseases (including cancer) have increased in frequency,
severity, and variety to an alarming extent. To no medium of transmission is the widespread
dissemination of this class of diseases so largely related as to vaccination.

—B. F. Cornell, M.D., practitioner

I have removed cancer from vaccinated arms exactly where the poison was injected.

—Dr. E. J. Post, Michigan practitioner

I have no hesitation in stating that in my judgment the most frequent disposing condition for
cancerous development is infused into the blood by vaccination and re-vaccination.

—Dr. Dennis Turnbull, 30 year cancer researcher.

Never in the history of medicine has there been produced so false a theory, and such fraudulent
assumptions, such disastrous and damning results as have followed the practice of vaccination; it
is the ultima Thule of learned quackery, and lacks, and has ever lacked, the faintest shadow of
scientific basis. The fears of the people have been played upon as to the dangers of smallpox, and
the promise of sure prevention by vaccination, until nearly the whole civilized world has become
physically corrupted by its practice.

—Dr. E. Ripley, Connecticut practitioner

Vaccination is the infusion of contaminating elements into the system, and after such
contamination you can never be sure of regaining the former purity of the body. Consumption
(tuberculosis) follows in the wake of vaccination just as surely as effect follows cause.

—Dr. Alex Wilder, professor of pathology, Medical College of New York

How is it that smallpox is five time as likely to be fatal in the vaccinated as unvaccinated
(referring to data published in the British Medical Journal, January 14th, 1928)? How is it that,
as the number of people vaccinated has steadily fallen, the number of people attacked with
variola has declined and the case mortality has progressively lessened? The years of least
vaccination have been the years of least smallpox and least mortality. These are just a few points
in connection with the subject which are puzzling me, and to which I want answers.
—Dr. L. A. Parry

I now have very little faith in vaccination, even as to modifying the disease, and none at all as a
protective in virulent epidemics. Personally, I contracted smallpox less than six months after a
most severe vaccination.

—Dr. R. Hall Bakewell, Vaccinator General of Trinidad

I believed that vaccination prevented smallpox...and I believed that re-vaccination, if only

frequently enough, gave absolute immunity. Experience has driven all that out of my head.

—Dr. J. C. Ward, Royal College of Surgeons, England

After collecting the particulars of 400,000 cases of smallpox, I am compelled to admit that my
belief in vaccination is absolutely destroyed.

—Professor A. Vogt, chair of Vita Statistics and Hygiene at Berne University

Many studies were conducted that confirmed that the smallpox was actually dangerous and
largely ineffective. In 1915, the U.S. Department of Agriculture linked several foot-and-mouth
disease epidemics to the smallpox vaccine. [U.S. Department of Agriculture. Farmer's Bulletin
(April 22, 1915):15]

In the mid-1920's, Great Britain authorized the Andrews and then the Rolleston Committee to
study post-vaccinal encephalitis and deaths resulting from the smallpox vaccination.

The contents of this Report were of so damaging a character that it was deemed advisable to
withhold it from publication. In this (the Rolleston) Report ninety-three cases of post-vaccinal
encephalitis with fifty-one deaths are stated to have occurred between Nov., 1922, and Sept.,
1927, and in a subsequent Report (Cmd. 3738), covering the three following years, there are
recorded a further ninety cases with forty-two deaths.

Among the “damaging” results from these reports were that young adults vaccinated against
smallpox were five times more likely to die from the disease than the un-vaccinated! It's no
wonder that many respectable institutions were beginning to question Jenner and his legacy.

The indisposition of the authorities to admit any awkward facts telling against vaccination is a
feature in the history of Jennerism. Thus, until 1911 it was the practice to tabulate deaths
following vaccination under the heading—“Cowpox and other Effects of Vaccination.”

At the date referred to a new heading, “Vaccinia,” was introduced...five deaths, all of infants,
which would in former years have been assigned to the effects of vaccination, appear under the
respective headings of erysipelas, pyaemia, septicaemia, convulsions, and phlegmon.
Possibly the Registrar-General could offer some reason for altering the practice of thirty years,
but the effect, none the less, is to exonerate vaccination by attributing death to secondary causes
instead of to the primary cause—vaccination.

In May 1926, the New York State Journal of Medicine reported on several cases of encephalitis
and meningitis that developed shortly after smallpox vaccinations.

In July of that year, the Journal of American Medical Association [found correlations](It is
impossible to deny a connection between vaccination and the encephalitis which follows it.)
between smallpox vaccinations and nervous disturbances. The authors noted: “In regions in
which there is no organized vaccination of the population, general paralysis is rare. It is
impossible to deny a connection between vaccination and the encephalitis which follows it.”

In September 1926, Lancet published data confirming seven cases of encephalomyelitis

following smallpox vaccinations. The authors, Turnbull and McIntosh, declared: “There can be
no doubt that vaccination was a definite causal factor.”

The next month Lancet reported on 35 cases of encephalitis, including 15 deaths. The authors
concluded: “Vaccination was a definite causal factor and no chance coincidence.”

In 1928, the League of Nations issued a report that noted, “The post-vaccinal encephalitis with
which we are dealing has become a problem in itself...Their occurrence has led to the realization
that a new, or at least a previously unsuspected or unrecognized, risk attaches to the practice of
vaccination.”

The Report also noted 139 recent cases of post-vaccinal encephalitis and 41 deaths in one
country alone, Holland. Compulsory smallpox vaccinations were discontinued as a result.
[Health Organization of the League of Nations: Geneva. “Report of the Commission of Smallpox
and Vaccination,” (August 27, 1928)]

In February 1930, Germany modified its compulsory vaccination law following numerous cases
of post-vaccinal diseases: “Vaccinated people developed a cerebral inflammation which resulted
in a number of deaths and several cases of mental derangement.” [The International News
Service (February 27, 1930)]

Later that year, the Journal of the American Medical Association reported on several fatal
reactions among children following smallpox vaccination. They were described as having
“encephalitic symptoms.” [J of the American Medical Association (April 5, 1930)]

From 1949 to 1951, in the United States, people died from complications of the smallpox
vaccine—mainly from post-vaccinal encephalitis—at rates eight times greater than those who
were not vaccinated.

In December of 1952, Lancet published a study documenting the reaction of a woman who was
three months pregnant to the vaccine: “She developed a severe primary reaction and three
months later she was spontaneously delivered of a feeble hydropic premature infant covered with
a very severe generalized vaccinia. The child died 18 hours later.”

Another study determined that 47% of women who were vaccinated during their first trimester
failed to give birth to a normal child. [McBean, E., pg. 82.]

During the late 1950s and 1960s, several medical and scientific publications documented
numerous cases of post-vaccinal encephalomyelitis following smallpox vaccination.
Neurological reactions ranged from encephalitis to epilepsy, polyneuritis, multiple sclerosis, and
death.

In some regions of the world, 1 of every 63 people vaccinated was damaged by the shot. Extreme
sensitivity to multiple shots was also observed. Subsequent inoculations were responsible for
many of the post-vaccinal ailments. In fact, the death rate from vaccination appeared greatest in
those who were vaccinated early in life and then re-vaccinated in later years. The morbidity and
mortality rates were extremely high in babies as well.

These statements come from multiple sources, including:

Miller, H. et al. “Multiple sclerosis and vaccination.” British Medical Journal (April 22, 1967):
210-213.

Neff, JM., et al. “Complications of smallpox vaccination, United States, 1963.” Pediatrics
1967;39:916-923.

Lane, MJ. “Complications of smallpox vaccination” New England Journal of Medicine 1968;281
(22):1201-08.

Spillane, JD., et al. “The neurology of Jennerian vaccination—a clinical account of the
neurological complications which occurred during the smallpox epidemic in South Wales in
1962.”

Dick, GWA. “Scientific Proceedings; Symposium on Virus Diseases. 13th Annual Meeting of
the British Medical Association, Belfast.” British Medical Journal, 1962;2:319.

Dixon, CW. Smallpox. (London: J & A Churchill, 1962).

Smallpox and AIDS
By the 1980's, a link between contracting AIDS after receiving the smallpox vaccination became
apparent: “Primary smallpox immunization of persons with subclinical HIV disease poses a risk
of vaccine-induced disease and multiple immunizations may accelerate the progress of HIV
disease.”

According to researchers, this raises “concern about the ultimate safety of vaccinia-based
vaccine in developing countries where HIV infection is increasing.” [Redfield, R., et al.
“Disseminated vaccinia in a military recruit with human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) disease.”
New England Journal of Medicine (March 12, 1987):673]

In 1987, shortly after the results of this study were released, the London Times published an
incredible report that claimed “the AIDS epidemic may have been triggered by the mass
vaccination campaign.” The campaign in question was conducted by the World Health
Organization during the 1960s and 1970s, mainly in Africa.

The Times exposé was written in response to a tip from an advisor to the World Health
Organization who was assigned by WHO to investigate the suspicion that its ambitious
vaccination program in Africa had caused the AIDS epidemic.

The WHO advisor did his study, concluded that the smallpox vaccine was a trigger for AIDS,
and filed his report with WHO. When the report was buried, he contacted the Times.

The regions that received the most vaccinations coincided with the areas of the greatest
outbreaks of AIDS, including Zaire, Zambia, Tanzania, Uganda, Malawai, Ruanda, and Burundi.
Brazil had the highest AIDS rates in South Africa, and they were the only country including in
the smallpox vaccination campaign on the entire continent.

According to the WHO advisor, “I thought it was just a coincidence until we studied the latest
findings about the reactions which can be caused by vaccinia. Now I believe the smallpox
vaccination theory is the explanation of AIDS.”

Dr. Robert Gallo, a pioneering AIDS/HIV researcher, when confronted with this disturbing
scenario, did little to alleviate anyone's fears: “I have been saying for some years that the use of
live vaccines such as that used for smallpox can activate a dormant infection such as HIV.”

Recent research has also shown that unsterile injections may have done a great deal in
contributing to the HIV epidemic in Africa: “We conclude that increased unsterile injecting in
Africa during the period 1950-1970 provided the agent for SIV human infections to emerge as
epidemic HIV in the modern era.”

Did an attempt to control one disease, smallpox, transform another disease, AIDS, “from a minor
endemic illness of the Third World into the current pandemic?”
Monkeypox
Some researchers question whether smallpox was ever truly exterminated. After WHO launched
its global vaccination campaign against variola in 1967, suspected cases of smallpox were
labeled as monkeypox.

Lancet published a report in 1972 that stated that WHO's program to eradicate smallpox “can
only be successful in the absence of a non-human reservoir for smallpox virus.”

However, the author of the report identified several poxviruses affecting both humans and
animals, and conceded that the monkeypox virus can cause clinical smallpox in humans.

In 1976, monkeypox antibodies in humans were discovered in Nigeria and the Ivory Coast. The
monkeypox virus was indistinguishable by laboratory methods from the smallpox virus.

Orthopoxviruses, the genera to which vaccinia, variola, cowpox, and monkeypox belong, have a
high degree of similarity, with a “propensity for genetic recombination.” Monkeypox and
smallpox produce exact clinical symptoms, with one insignificant difference: monkeypox also
causes swelling of the cervical and inguinal (groin) lymph nodes.

In 1979, new research indicated that several animal species, including some rodents, may be
carriers of variola-like viruses virtually identical to cowpox and monkeypox viruses. In fact,
several poxviruses from animal sources were tested and shown to behave like variola/smallpox
viruses.

Scientists are “wondering whether the specter of smallpox might be rising form the dead,
perhaps reincarnated in its close relative monkeypox, which is alive, well, and spreading in
Central Africa.” According to Dr. Peter Jahrling of the U.S. Army Medical Research Institute of
Infectious Diseases, for all practical purposes, smallpox is back. [Radio National. “The Health
Report: Monkeypox.” Australian Broadcasting Corporation (September 1, 1997)]
Bioterrorism, Dark Winter and the New Smallpox Vaccine
During the 1970s experimentation with smallpox virus was conducted, and two medical
researchers were even killed in England as a result. To reduce the risk of future accidents, all
remaining known samples were moved to a CDC facility in Georgia and the State Research
Center of Virology and Biotechnology in Novosibirsk, Siberia.

Numerous deadlines came and went to destroy the virus, with some scientists defending the need
to preserve them...“for science!”

On November 15th, 2001, in the wake of 9/11, the Bush administration postponed indefinitely
any decision to eliminate seed stocks of the microbe.

Even though smallpox hadn't occurred in the U.S. since 1949, the government had stockpiled 15
million doses of the vaccine. However, the disgusting concoction was severely archaic:

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, in Atlanta, has a reserve of roughly 15 million
doses of smallpox vaccine. That vaccine, which is not available to the public, was manufactured
using a method that dates from the 1700s.

The method involves infecting calves with a related virus, vaccinia; the resulting pus is used in
the making of the vaccine. That process is considered barely acceptable for human vaccine
today.

Not only that, but the vaccine was known to cause inflammation of the brain as well as numerous
other side effects, including smallpox itself and death. Sources:

Greenberg, M. “Complications of vaccination against smallpox.” Am J Dis Child 1948;76:492-

502

Cangemi, VF. “Acute pericarditis after smallpox vaccination.” *N Engl J Med 1958;258:1257-9.

Copeman, PWM., et al. “Eczema vaccinatum.” British Medical Journal 1964;2:906-8.

Neff, JM., et al. “Complications of smallpox vaccination. I. National survey in the United States,
1963. NEJM 1967;276:125–32.

Fulginiti VA., et al. “Progressive vaccinia in immunologically deficient individuals.” Birth

Defects Original Article Series. 1968;4:129–145.

Marmelzat, WL. “Malignant tumors in smallpox vaccination scars.” Arch Dermatol

1968;97:406.

Lane, JM., et al. “Routine childhood vaccination against smallpox reconsidered.” NEJM
1969;281:1220-4.
Lane, JM., et al. “Complications of smallpox vaccination, 1968. National surveillance in the
U.S.” NEJM 1969;281:1220-4.

Holtzman, CM. “Postvaccination arthritis.” NEJM 1969;280:111-2.

Lane, JM., et al. “Deaths attributable to smallpox vaccination, 1959 to 1966, and 1968.” JAMA
1970;212:441-4.

In 1997, four years before the 2001 terrorist attacks, the Department of Defense contracted with
DynPort Vaccine Company to produce a new smallpox vaccine. In September of 2000, one year
before the terrorist attacks, the CDC contracted with OraVax (which changed its name to
Acambis) to produce a new smallpox vaccine.

Some researchers were puzzled by these actions since smallpox was supposedly eradicated and
authorities were debating whether to destroy all of the remaining seed stocks of the virus.
According to Dr. Margaret Hamburg, of the Department of Health and Human Services, “A lot
of people thought this was a crazy idea, to make a new vaccine when the disease didn't exist.”

In June 2001, before the 9/11 attacks, a team of bioterrorism specialists led by the Johns Hopkins
University Center for Civilian Biodefense Studies conducted a smallpox epidemic exercise
ominously called Dark Winter.

Within two months after the hypothetical epidemic started, three million people were infected.
Dark Winter ended with the collapse of interstate commerce, crowds rioting in the streets, and
the nation moving towards martial law.

However, like any theoretical exercise, conclusions are predicated on the underlying
assumptions. One key assumption was that each person with smallpox would infect at least 10
other people and that those 10 people would each infect at least 10 more people and so on.

But a recent study published in Emerging Infectious Diseases regards those infection rates as
grossly unrealistic. The authors of the study looked at data from numerous smallpox outbreaks
and reported that on average less than one person was infected per infectious person.

In all outbreaks, some infected persons did not transmit a single case of smallpox to another
person. The CDC researchers concluded “the probability that the average transmission rate will
be greater than two cannot be demonstrated reliably.”

Even though the Dark Winter simulation was severely flawed, Dr. Henderson, the “team leader”
who also led WHO's global effort to eradicate smallpox, concluded that the threat was real and
recommended 100 to 135 million doses.

Less than 10 days after 9/11, Dick Cheney was shown a video of the Dark Winter simulation and
urged to increase the production of smallpox vaccine.
On October 24, 2001, President Bush asked Congress for $509 million to develop and produce a
new smallpox vaccine. He solicited bids for the job from several pharmaceutical companies,
insisting on 300 million doses—one dose for every American—within the shortest possible time,
not to exceed one year.

The new vaccine was expected to be made from a “diploid cell substrate” (human embryo) or
from animal tissue cell cultures, including those with “tumorigenic potential.”

Ideally, it would not cause adverse reactions, would not be dangerous to people with immune
system deficiencies, and would have the capacity to defeat genetically altered strains of variola.
But researchers provided no evidence that the new vaccine would cause fewer adverse reactions
than the old vaccine.

Furthermore, experts were very concerned about “the transmissibility of vaccinia virus from a
recently vaccinated person to a susceptible host.” In other words, some people—no one knows
how many—will develop smallpox by coming into contact with a recently vaccinated person.

Franklin Top, a biotechnology expert and previous commander of the Walter Reed Army
Institute of Research, declared that “reactogenicity” is going to be a problem.

Dr. Mark Buller, a virologist specializing in safer smallpox treatments at St. Louis University,
boldly pronounced: “I would not even consider having my family vaccinated. I'm more likely to
be hit riding my bike to work than be hit by a smallpox episode in my own life. [Stolberg, SG.
“Immunization: vast uncertainty on smallpox vaccine.” New York Times (October 19, 2001)]

Potential vaccine recipients must also understand that scientists may never be able to create a
vaccine that can protect against mutated strains of the virus. Dozens of strains already exist. New
permutations of the variola microbe could be developed by bioterrorists rendering a new vaccine
worthless, thus subjecting recipients of the shot to the inherent risk of serious adverse reactions
without the expected benefit.

In 2002, the U.S. government tested their existing smallpox vaccine on 200 “fit and healthy”
college students. Following vaccination, 75 had high fevers, one-third missed at least one day of
work or school, and several were put on antibiotics because their blisters resembled a bacterial
infection.

Dr. Kathy Edwards, the physician overseeing the study, commented on the side effects: “I can
read all day about it, but seeing it is quite impressive. The reactions we saw were really quite
remarkable.”
In late 2002, smallpox vaccination was reinstated for U.S. military personnel. In early 2003, the
program was expanded to include civilians considered at high risk during a smallpox outbreak
(mostly healthcare and emergency service workers).

Shortly thereafter, several vaccinated people experienced serious adverse reactions, including
heart problems. For example, a Maryland woman died from a hearth attack after being injected
with the shot.

These reports compelled the CDC to release a fact sheet on the smallpox vaccine to address the
many concerns, admitting, “There is evidence suggesting that smallpox vaccination may cause
cases of heart inflammation (myocarditis), inflammation of the membrane covering the heart
(pericarditis), and a combination of these two problems....Heart pain (angina) and heart attack
have also been reported after smallpox vaccination.”

In 2005, the Journal of the American Medical Association published a study that assessed the
safety of the government's program. The study documented nearly a thousand adverse events,
including 85 hospitalizations (numerous cases of myocarditis or pericarditis), and three deaths.
The report ends by suggesting:

Additional reduction of overall vaccinia adverse events might be achievable through study of
cardiac and dermatological risk factors, a better understanding of vaccinia host-pathogen
interaction, and development of a less reactogenic vaccinia vaccine.

In 2007, a two-year-old and his mother were infected with “eczema vaccinatum” after the father,
a U.S. army soldier, was recently vaccinated against smallpox.

Also in 2007, an experimental smallpox vaccine called ACAM2000 (made by Acambis) was
declared safe and effective by the FDA, despite the fact that clinical trials of this vaccine were
halted three years earlier when several people developed myopericarditis after receiving the new
vaccine.

According to the FDA, ACAM2000 is “nearly as effective” as the older smallpox vaccine,
Dryvax, and poses “similar risks of serious side effects.”

As for Dryvax, the listed adverse reactions include autoinoculation (transfer of the virus to other
parts of the body) affecting the face, nose, mouth, genitalia and rectum; infection of the eye
resulting in blindness; post-vaccinal encephalitis, encephalomyelitis, encephalopathy,
progressive vaccinia, eczema vaccinatum, Stevens-Johnson syndrome, neurological sequelae,
and death.

However, even while U.S. Homeland Security was contemplating mandating the smallpox
vaccine, not every government official was convinced. For example, Tommy Thompson of
Health and Human Services said his department had no plans for a mandatory vaccination
program, citing horrendous side effects as the principal reason. [Neergaard, L. “Health officials
review smallpox plan.” Associated Press (October 19, 2001)]
Dr. Anthony Fauci, director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, also
opposed the idea, declaring that side effects were too numerous and too severe. [Stolberg, SG.]

Many pediatricians can't distinguish between smallpox and chickenpox, according to the results
of a survey published in 2006 by Clinical Pediatrics.

Fifty-nine percent of the responders were unable to differentiate chickenpox from smallpox, and
the majority would not accept vaccination in the absence of an outbreak and would not
recommend smallpox vaccine to their patients. Even in previously vaccinated pediatricians,
willingness to receive smallpox vaccine is poor...

Despite the well-documented concerns about the safety of the smallpox vaccine and the threat
(and loss of civil liberties) associated with mandatory vaccines, on October 23, 2001, the CDC
unveiled new legislation, The Model State Emergency Health Powers Act, “giving public health
officials and state governors the authority to arrest, vaccinate, medicate, and quarantine anyone
they deem either unprotected from, or a threat to spread, infectious disease (see Section 504a—
Vaccination and treatment).”

Local police and the U.S. military, by way of the National Guard, would enforce the law.
Previous laws permitting medical, religious, or philosophical exemptions would be repealed.

In response to this legislation, Dawn Richardson of PROVE, a vaccine awareness organization,

declared:

Everyone who values our freedoms and rights in this country needs to commit to educating
family and friends about the dangers of such an unchecked medical dictatorship.

Because there has been no research into the biological mechanisms that predispose people to
vaccine reactions and there has been no effort to screen out these individuals, this type of action
should be condemned; it will create unfathomable human suffering and sacrifice. [Richardson,
D. “Danger: forced vaccination for all under CDC's proposal.” PROVE newsletter (November 2,
2001)]

This legislation also exempts the State, the police, and public health authorities from any
liability. “If an individual opposes vaccines, is force-inoculated and dies, the perpetrators cannot
be prosecuted.”

The ACLU also weighed in quite heavily against the MSEHPA.

Because of the increasing number of reported side effects, Congressman Henry Waxman was
forced to state the obvious: “The president has asked healthcare workers to volunteer to be
immunized so that they can serve society. In turn, society should help them if they are hurt when
they volunteer.”

In response to these concerns, in 2006 the U.S. government published the “final rules” to the
Smallpox Vaccine Injury Compensation Program. The goal was to provide “benefits to public
health and medical response team members and others who are injured as a result of receiving
the smallpox vaccine.”

Also, “unvaccinated individuals injured after coming into contact with a vaccinated member of
an emergency response plan, or with a person with whom the vaccinated person had contact, or
their survivors may be eligible for the same program benefits.”

In conclusion, Neil Miller offers a crude, but damning, summary of this alternative perspective
of the history of smallpox and the smallpox vaccine:

1. Being with unsanitary living conditions and poor nutritional awareness. This results in
regional and self-limiting outbreaks of smallpox.
2. Conduct human experiments with variolation—the practice of inserting viral matter
(infectious pus) from a smallpox victim into a deliberate cut on a healthy person.
3. When this fails, conduct human experiments with cowpox, horsepox, and horsegrease
cowpox.
4. When this fails, deny it.
5. When this fails, blame it on “spurious” cowpox, improperly administered injections, or
too few puncture marks...and recommend re-vaccination.
6. When this fails, manipulate statistics by altering medical records and falsifying death
certificates...and mandate the smallpox vaccine.
7. When people refuse the shot, vaccination rates drop, and cases of smallpox dwindle...take
full credit for eradicating the disease!
Paralysis and the Politics of Polio
Poliomyelitis, or polio, is a contagious disease caused by a virus that may attack nerve cells of
the brain and spinal cord.

Fever, headache, sore throat, vomiting are some of the milder symptoms, and some victims
develop neurological complications and paralysis of one or more limbs or respiratory muscles. In
severe cases it can be fatal, due to respiratory paralysis.

Some people mistakenly believe that polio usually leads to paralysis, but this isn't the case.

95% of people exposed to the natural polio virus don't exhibit any symptoms, even under
epidemic conditions, according to the Physicians' Desk Reference 2001 and Natural History of
Infectious Disease by Sir Frank Macfarlane Burnet and David O. White.

The Wikipedia article on polio initially cites the figure as 90%, but elsewhere on the page the
“asymptomatic” outcome of poliovirus infection is listed as 90%-95%. According to the source
used for these statistics, “Up to 95% of all polio infections are inapparent or asymptomatic.”

About 5% of infected people will experience mild symptoms such as a sore throat, stiff neck,
headache, and fever—often diagnosed as a cold or flu. Muscular paralysis affects approximately
one out of every 1,000 people who contract polio.

This has lead some scientific researchers to conclude that the small percentage of people who do
develop paralytic polio may be anatomically susceptible to the disease. The vast remainder of the
population may be naturally immune to the polio virus. [Moskowitz, R. “Immunizations: the
other side.” Mothering (Spring 1984):36]

Usually there is a full recovery from paralytic polio—it rarely is permanent. Only a small
percentage of cases will experience residual paralysis.

There are many serious questions about what factors contribute to increasing an individual's
susceptibility to serious adverse reactions to the polio virus.

Several studies have demonstrated that injections, either for vaccines or antibiotics, increase
susceptibility to polio. It's been known since the early 1900s that paralytic poliomyelitis can start
at the site of an injection.

When diphtheria and pertussis vaccines were introduced in the 1940s, cases of paralytic
poliomyelitis skyrocketed. This was documented in Lancet and other medical journals.

McCloskey, BP. “The relation of prophylactic inoculations to the onset of poliomyelitis.” Lancet
(April 18, 1950):659-63

Geffen, DH “The incidence of paralysis occurring in London children within four weeks after
immunization.” Med Officer 1950;83:137-40
Martin, JK. “Local paralysis in children after injections.” Arch Dis Child 1950;25:1-14

In 1949, the Medical Research Council in Great Britain set up a committee to investigate the
matter and ultimately concluded that individuals are at increased risk of paralysis for 30 days
following injections; injections alter the distribution of paralysis; and it did not matter whether
the injections were subcutaneous or intramuscular.

In 1992, a study was published in the Journal of Infectious Diseases that again confirmed these
results after documenting an outbreak of polio in Oman that was linked to the DTP (diphtheria,
tetanus, and pertussis) shot. They concluded that “injections are an important cause of
provocative poliomyelitis.”

In 1995, the New England Journal of Medicine published a study showing that children who
received a single injection within one month after receiving a polio vaccine were 8 times more
likely to contract polio than children who received no injections.

The risk jumped 27-fold when children received up to nine injections...and with ten or more
injections, the likelihood of developing polio was 182 times greater than expected.

Why injections increase the risk of polio is unclear. Nevertheless, these studies and others
indicate that “injections must be avoided in countries with endemic poliomyelitis.” Health
authorities believe that all “unnecessary” injections should be avoided as well.

A poor diet has been shown to raise one's susceptibility to polio.

In 1948, during the height of the polio epidemics, Dr. Benjamin Sandler, a nutritional expert at
the Oteen Veterans' Hospital, documented a link between polio and an excessive use of sugars
and starches.

He compiled records showing that countries with the highest per capita consumption of sugar,
such as the United States, Britain, Australia, Canada, and Sweden (with over 100 pounds per
person per year) had the greatest incidence of polio. In contrast, polio was practically unheard of
in China (with its sugar use of only 3 pounds per person per year).

Sandler claimed that sugars and starches lower blood sugar levels which leads to hypoglycemia.

Such food dehydrate the cells and leech calcium from the body. A serious calcium deficiency
precedes polio. Researchers have always known that polio strikes with its greatest intensity
during the hot summer months.

Dr. Sandler observed that children consume greater amounts of ice cream, soft drinks, and
artificially sweetened products in hot weather. In 1949, before the polio season began, he warned
the residents of North Carolina, through the newspapers and radio, to decrease their consumption
of these products.
That summer, North Carolinians reduced their intake of sugar by 90%; polio decreased by the
same amount! The North Carolina State Health Department reported 2,498 cases of polio in 1948
and 229 cases in 1949. [Data taken from North Carolina State Health Department figures]

One manufacturer shipped one million less gallons of ice cream during the first week alone
following the publication of Dr. Sandler's anti-polio diet. Soft drink sales were down as well.

But powerful Rockefeller Milk Trust, which sold frozen products to North Carolinians,
combined forces with soft drink business leaders and convinced the public that Sandler's findings
were a myth and the polio figures a fluke. By the summer of 1950 sales were back to previous
levels and polio cases returned to “normal.” [McBean, E., Allen, H.]

As can be seen by this graph of United States polio rates, polio epidemics became a serious
problem in the late 1940s and early 1950s, although it never quite reached the levels of 1916
(when the epicenter of the epidemic was mere miles from a Rockefeller research lab that was
experimenting with an extremely virulent strain of the polio virus).

By the early 1950s, Jonas Salk began experimenting with a possible polio vaccine.

In 1952, Salk combined three types of polio virus grown in cultures made from monkey kidneys.
Using formaldehyde, he was able to “kill” or inactivate the viral matter so that it would trigger an
antibody response without causing the disease.

In 1955, the first polio immunization campaign was launched in the United States. Almost
immediately, it became clear that something was very wrong with the vaccine. In the end, 70,000
school children became seriously ill from Salk's vaccine—the infamous “Cutter Incident.”

The mistake resulted in the production of 120,000 doses of polio vaccine that contained live
polio virus. Of the children who received the vaccine, 40,000 developed abortive poliomyelitis.
The Cutter incident was one of the worst pharmaceutical disasters in U.S. history.

The renowned surgeon Alton Ochsner even gave the vaccine to two of his grandchildren...one
died and the other was paralyzed. “Apparently, Salk's killed-virus vaccine was not completely
inactivated.”

Perhaps it was their eagerness to get the polio vaccine developed and distributed as quickly as
possible, but unfortunately the NIH did receive dire warnings before the release of the vaccine...a
warning from one of their own.

Dr. Bernice Eddy and her research partner Dr. Sarah Stewart are two of the most important
scientists of the 20th century in the field of viral research.

Stewart developed an interest in researching viral links to cancer in light of the pioneering
research of Jonas Salk in developing a vaccine for the virus which caused polio. Stewart is
credited with discovering the Polyomavirus in 1953.
She and research partner, Dr. Bernice Eddy, were successful in growing the virus in 1958 and the
SE (Stewart-Eddy) polyoma virus is named after them. Stewart was the first to successfully
demonstrate that viruses causing cancer could be spread from animal to animal.

The NIH Laboratory of Biologics Control, which had certified the Cutter polio vaccine, had
received advance warnings of problems: in 1954, staff member Dr. Bernice Eddy had reported to
her superiors that some of the inoculated monkeys had become paralyzed (pictures were sent as
well). William Sebrell, the director of NIH wouldn't hear of such a thing.

Perhaps he should have listened, for a result, “The director of the microbiology institute lost his
job, as did the equivalent of the assistant secretary for health. Dr Sebrell, the director of the NIH,
resigned.”

Incredibly, instead of acknowledging Eddy for her validated concerns, they took her off polio
research and instead ordered her to the influenza research division. Eddy continued her polio
research on her own time, ultimately leading to one of the greatest medical conspiracies of the
20th century.

Following the Cutter Incident, the authorities acted quickly to alleviate the public's legitimate
concerns about the safety of the recently developed polio vaccine.

The vaccine was redeveloped, and by August 1955 over 4 million doses were administered in the
United States. By 1959, nearly 100 other countries were using Salk's vaccine.

In 1957 Albert Sabin developed an oral live-virus polio vaccine over concerns that Salk's killed-
virus vaccine would be ineffective at preventing epidemics. Sabin's goal was to simulate a real-
life infection.

This meant using an attenuated or weakened form of the live virus. He experimented with
thousands of monkeys and chimpanzees before isolating a rare type of polio virus that would
reproduce in the intestinal tract without penetrating the central nervous system.

The initial human trials were conducted in foreign countries. In 1958, it was tested in the U.S. In
1963, Sabin's oral “sugar-cube” vaccine became available for general use.

However, it cannot be given to people with compromised immune systems. Plus it is capable of
causing polio in some recipients of the vaccine, and in individuals with compromised immune
systems who come into close contact with recently vaccinated children.

Strebel, PM., et al. “Epidemiology of polio in U.S. one decade after the last reported case of
indigenous wild virus associated disease.” Clin Infec Dis, CDC (Feb 1992):568-79

Gorman, C. “When the vaccine causes the polio.” Time (October 30, 1995):83.

Shaw, D. “Unintended casualties in war on polio.” Philadelphia Inquirer (June 6, 1993):A1.

In 2000, the CDC “updated” its U.S. polio vaccine recommendations, reverting back to policies
first implemented during the 1950s, namely the killed-virus shot. The oral polio vaccine should
only be used in “special circumstances” (several countries still use the live-virus, oral vaccine).

However, a fact sheet on polio published by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services
warns parents that the inactivated polio vaccine can cause “serious problems or even deaths.”
One of the manufacturers of the IPV also admits that Guillain–Barré syndrome has been
“temporarily linked to administration of another IPV.”

Yet, despite these “danger alerts,” medical authorities continue to assure parents that the
currently available inactivated polio vaccine is both safe and effective.

Now that we understand the dangers of Salk's early vaccine and the possibility of it actually
infecting the recipient with serious cases of polio, it should come as no surprise that statistics
confirm that the reported cases of polio following mass inoculations with the killed-virus vaccine
may have more than doubled in the U.S. as a whole. [McBean, E. & Allen, H.]

For example, Vermont reported 15 cases of polio during the one-year report period ending
August 30, 1954 (before mass inoculations), compared to 55 cases of polio during the one-year
period ending August 30, 1955 (after mass inoculations)—a 266% increase.

Rhode Island reported 22 cases during the before inoculations period as compared to 122 cases
during the after inoculations period—a 454% increase.

In New Hampshire the figures increased from 38 to 129; in Connecticut they rose from 144 to
276; and in Massachusetts they swelled 273 to 2027—a whopping 642% increase.

Many NIH doctors and scientists at the NIH during the 1950s were aware that Salk's vaccine was
causing polio.

Some frankly stated that it was “worthless as a preventive and dangerous to take.” They refused
to vaccinate their own children. Health departments banned the inoculations.

Salk himself allegedly said: “When you inoculate children with a polio vaccine you don't sleep
well for two or three weeks.” [As reported by Saul Pett in an Associated Press dispatch from
Pittsburg (October 11, 1954)]

The Idaho State Health Director angrily declared: “I hold the Salk vaccine and its manufacturers
responsible” for a polio outbreak that killed several Idahoans and hospitalized dozens more.”
[McBean, E. The Poisoned Needle (Mokelumne Hill, CA: Health Research, 1957): pp. 140-44]

But the National Foundation for Infantile Paralysis, and drug companies with large investments
in the vaccine coerced the U.S. Public Health Service into falsely proclaiming the vaccine was
safe and effective. [Ibid., pp. 142-45]
Salk continued to worry. Despite its regulatory and statistical ‘success’, the reputation of his
vaccine was plummeting. In June 1955 the British doctors’ union the Medical Practitioners’
Union wrote: “These misfortunes would be almost endurable if a whole new generation were to
be rendered permanently immune to the disease. In fact, there is no evidence that any lasting
immunity is achieved.”

The following month Canada suspended its distribution of Salk’s vaccine. By November all
European countries had suspended distribution plans, apart from Denmark. By January 1957 17
US states had stopped distributing the vaccine. The same year The New York Times reported
that nearly 50% of cases of infantile paralysis in children between the ages of five and 14 had
occurred after vaccination.

In 1976, Salk even testified that the live-virus vaccine (used almost exclusively in the U.S. from
the early 1960s to 2000) was the “principal if not sole cause” of all reported cases of polio in the
U.S. since the early 1960s. [Washington Post, September 24, 1976.]

In 1992, the federal Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) published an admission
that the live-virus vaccine had become the dominant cause of polio in the United States.

Although authorities claimed that the vaccine caused only 8 cases of polio each year, an
independent study “uncovered 13,641 reports of adverse events following use of the oral polio
vaccine. These reports included 6,364 hospital/emergency room visits and 540 deaths.” [Vaccine
Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS); OPV Vaccine Report—Document #14]

Eventually, after the public became increasingly aware of the dangers of the oral polio vaccine, it
was removed from immunization schedules.

There has been much speculation that the polio vaccine did little, if anything, to cause the virus
to disappear. Dr. Robert Mendelsohn, a medical researcher and pediatrician, claimed that there
was no scientific evidence this was the case.

From 1923 to 1953, before the Salk killed-virus vaccine was introduced, the polio death rate in
the United States and England had already declined on its own by 47% and 55% respectively.
Statistics show a similar decline in other European countries as well. [Alderson, M. International
Mortality Statistics (Washington, DC: Facts on File, 1981):177-8]

And when the vaccine did become available, many European countries questioned its
effectiveness and refused to systematically inoculate their citizens. Yet, polio epidemics also
ended in these countries.

Part of the reason for the apparent decline in polio rates after the introduction of the vaccine,
even while it was infecting many people with polio, was that polio was redefined at the same the
vaccination program began.
The subject was controversial enough to be discussed during congressional hearings in 1962,
when Dr. Bernard Greenberg, chairman of the Committee on Evaluation and Standards of the
American Public Health Association, provided expert testimony documenting this important fact.

Prior to the introduction of the vaccine the patient only had to exhibit paralytic symptoms for 24
hours. Laboratory confirmation and tests to determine residual paralysis were not required.

The new definition required the patient to exhibit paralytics symptoms for at least 60 days, and
residual paralysis had to be confirmed twice during the course of the disease.

Also, cases of aseptic meningitis, a condition with many variations and causes, were formally
distinguished from the polio vaccine after the vaccine was introduced, as well as coxsackie virus
infections (which can also lead to aseptic meningitis).

Both Guillain-Barré disease and aseptic meningitis were diagnosed as polio during the US
epidemics prior to 1957. If you use the pre-1957 definition, then there are many more cases of
poliomyelitis occurring in the US today, than there were in 1952—at the height of the US polio
epidemics.

The Textbook of Child Neurology reported: “Coxsackie virus and echoviruses can cause
paralytic syndromes that are clinically indistinguishable from paralytic poliomyelitis.” This new
requirement for doctors caused a vast drop in the number of cases registered as poliomyelitis—a
drop that ever since has been credited solely to the vaccine.

Dr. Bernard Greenberg, who also was head of the Dept. of Biostatistics for the University of
North Carolina School of Public Health, “testified that not only did the cases of polio increase
substantially after mandatory vaccinations—a 50% increase from 1957 to 1958, and an 80%
increase from 1958 to 1959—but that the statistics were deliberately manipulated by the Public
Health Service to give the opposite impression.” According to Greenberg:

Prior to 1954 any physician who reported paralytic poliomyelitis was doing his patient a service
by way of subsidizing the cost of hospitalization....Two examinations at least 24 hours apart was
all that was required....In 1955 the criteria were changed...residual paralysis was determined 10
to 20 days after onset of illness and again 50 to 70 days after onset.

This change in definition meant that in 1955 we started reporting a new disease....Furthermore,
diagnostic procedures have continued to be refined. Coxsackie virus infections and aseptic
meningitis have been distinguished from poliomyelitis....Thus, simply by changes in diagnostic
criteria, the number of paralytics cases was predetermined to decrease.

Some have speculated that approximately 90% of polio cases were eliminated from statistics by
health authorities’ redefinition of the disease when the vaccine was introduced. In reality, the
Salk vaccine contributed to increased cases of polio in numerous countries at a time when there
were no epidemics being caused by the wild virus.
Polio has not been eradicated by vaccination, it is lurking behind a redefinition and new
diagnostic names like viral or aseptic meningitis...there are some 30,000 to 50,000 cases of viral
meningitis per year in the United States alone. That's where all those 30,000 to 50,000 cases of
polio disappeared after the introduction of mass vaccination.

According to proponents of this claim, polio now “hides” behind the following conditions: acute
flaccid paralysis, transverse myelitis, viral or aseptic meningitis, Guillain–Barré syndrome,
Chinese paralytic syndrome, spinal meningitis, inhibitory palsy, etc.

The Los Angeles County health authorities stated: “Most cases reported prior to July 1, 1958 of
non-paralytic poliomyelitis are now reported as viral or aseptic meningitis.”

In July 1955, before the new polio definition was introduced, there were 273 reported cases of
polio in Los Angeles County, as compared to 50 reported cases of aseptic meningitis.

In July 1961, after the new definition was introduced, there were 65 cases of polio and 161 cases
of aseptic meningitis. In September 1966, there were only 5 reported cases of polio, and 256
reported cases of aseptic meningitis. [Los Angeles County Health Index: Morbidity and
Mortality, Reportable Diseases.]

The incidence of meningitis skyrocketed as “official” polio cases declined, as the following data,
compiled from national surveillance reports, shows.

Non-paralytic polio cases vs. aseptic meningitis cases:

1951-1960: 70,083 - 0

1961-1982: 589 - 102,999

1983-1992: 0 - 117,366

If this process of reclassification had not occurred, it would have been impossible to hide the fact
that infantile paralysis cases had sharply increased after the introduction of Salk’s vaccine.

DDT is good for me-e-e!

DDT may have played a significant role in the polio epidemics of the 1940s and 50s. By the
early 1960s, it finally became understood that DDT was having a devastating impact on the
environment and possibly human health.

DDT spraying and DDT delousing were both extremely, and terrifyingly, common before this
realization.
In 1953, Morton S. Biskind published a damning report called “Public health aspects of the new
insecticides.” A decade before Rachel Carson would release her groundbreaking Silent Spring,
Biskind was desperately trying to sound the alarm:

It was even known by 1945 that DDT is stored in the body fat of mammals and appears in the
milk. With this foreknowledge the series of catastrophic events that followed the most intensive
campaign of mass poisoning in known human history, should not have surprised the experts.

Yet, far from admitting a causal relationship so obvious that in any other field of biology it
would be instantly accepted, virtually the entire apparatus of communication, lay and scientific
alike, has been devoted to denying, concealing, suppressing, distorting and attempts to convert
into its opposite, the overwhelming evidence. Libel, slander and economic boycott have not been
overlooked in this campaign.

Dr. Biskind had the composure to argue what he thought was the most obvious explanation for
the polio epidemic: Central nervous system diseases (CNS) such as polio are actually the
physiological and symptomatic manifestations of the ongoing government- and industry-
sponsored inundation of the world's populace with central nervous system poisons.

Biskind emphasized physiological evidence of DDT poisoning that resembled polio physiology:

Particularly relevant to recent aspects of this problem are neglected studies by Lillie and his
collaborators of the National Institutes of Health, published in 1944 and 1947 respectively,
which showed that DDT may produce degeneration of the anterior horn cells of the spinal cord in
animals. These changes do not occur regularly in exposed animals any more than they do in
human beings, but they do appear often enough to be significant.

He continues, bearing his exasperation in trying to make the obvious plain. “When the
population is exposed to a chemical agent known to produce in animals lesions in the spinal cord
resembling those in human polio, and thereafter the latter disease increases sharply in incidence
and maintains its epidemic character year after year, is it unreasonable to suspect an etiologic
relationship?”

A German study of the physiology of acute DDT poisoning confirmed that DDT often causes
polio-like physiology.

Biskind's views fell into disfavor after the introduction of the polio vaccine, which “proved” to
most that the majority of polio cases were caused by a virus. By 1955, Biskind, whose works had
been published in established medical journals and who testified before the Senate on the
dangers of pesticides, was forced self-publish his writings.

The Present Polio Predicament

Problems with the polio vaccine continue today, for in February of 2014, a study was published
identifying a “polio-like” illness in five California children. “All children presented with acute
flaccid paralysis of one or more limbs that reached peak severity within 48 hours of onset...All
had been previously vaccinated against polio-virus.”

What the Abstract authors may not know is that 47,500 cases of vaccine-induced polio paralysis
followed an oral polio vaccination campaign conducted by the GAVI Alliance, Bill & Melinda
Gates Foundation, and the World Health Organization (WHO) in India in 2011.

Incredibly, the oral polio vaccine was given to Indian children, despite the fact that in the U.S.,
the CDC had dropped the OPV from its vaccine schedule because it was causing polio.

According to Neetu Vashisht and Jacob Puliyel at St. Stephens Hospital in Delhi:

The charade about polio eradication and the great savings it will bring has persisted to date. It is
a paradox that while the director general of WHO and Bill Gates are trying to muster support for
polio eradication it has been known to the scientific community, for over 10 years, that
eradication of polio is impossible.

This is because in 2002 scientists had synthesized a chemical called poliovirus in a test-tube with
the empirical formula C332,652H492,388N98,245O131,196P7, 501S2,340. It has been
demonstrated that by positioning the atoms in sequence, a particle can emerge with all the
properties required for its proliferation and survival in nature.

Vashisht and Puliyel published their findings in the Indian Journal of Medical Ethics and
“should have made headlines around the globe.” They determined:

…while India has been polio-free for a year, there has been a huge increase in non-polio acute
flaccid paralysis (NPAFP). In 2011, there were an extra 47,500 new cases of NPAFP.

Clinically indistinguishable from polio paralysis but twice as deadly, the incidence of NPAFP
was directly proportional to doses of oral polio received. Though this data was collected within
the polio surveillance system, it was not investigated. The principle of primum-non-nocere [First,
do no harm] was violated.

For more information, here's one of the best lectures on the subject of polio available on
Youtube. Suzanne Humphries, MD, speaks about the “disappearance” of polio, and includes
detailed information about the deceptive reclassification of “polio” and the connection between
the rampant use of DDT and polio-like disorders of the central nervous system.

If this brief overview doesn't already raise serious questions and concerns about the history of the
polio vaccine, then strap yourselves in.

SV40

We return to 1959 and the pioneering work of Dr. Bernice Eddy, whose previous warnings about
the Salk polio vaccine went unheeded, resulting in many deaths. For her efforts, she was
removed from polio research at the NIH.
For a complete account of Eddy and her story, read The Virus and the Vaccine: Contaminated
Vaccine, Deadly Cancers, and Government Neglect.

History, as they say, is doomed to repeat herself, for Eddy would yet again discover something
was wrong with the polio vaccine. This time, however, the ramifications would be far more
catastrophic, and her subsequent silencing was much more profound.

Dr. Eddy was fresh from her research into viral causes of cancer and her pioneering work in first
describing the polyoma virus. However, she soon would earn the dubious honor of being the first
to identify what we now call SV40 (Simian virus 40), an infectious agent capable of causing
cancer.

SV40 had widely contaminated the polio vaccine, and Eddy desperately tried to sound the alarm.
Even though her previous warnings, if heeded, would have prevented the tragic Cutter Incident,
she yet again was met with astonishing opposition.

What happened next was tragic not only for Eddy herself, but it precipitated one of the worst
medical blunders/conspiracies of the 20th century.

The Health Century by Edward Shorter offers the following account of this story:

Sarah Stewart and Bernice Eddy's discovery of the polyoma in 1957 marked the real takeoff of
theories about virus and cancer. It could be destructive like polio, but produce tumors at the same
time.

At the same time in the late 1950s that Eddy and Stewart were producing cancers in animals with
the polyoma virus, Eddy had sneaked back to the polio vaccine. “I did things on the side which I
wasn't assigned to do,” Eddy said. One of them was starting to conduct safety experiments on the
polio vaccine in June 1959, from which she had officially been removed four years earlier.

In observing cells from the kidneys of rhesus monkeys under the microscope—the kind of cell
preparation from which the polio vaccine was being made by private drug companies—Eddy had
noted spontaneous degeneration, meaning that the cells would start to die without any apparent
cause.

She did more experiments with these cells, and on July 6, 1960, reported to her chief Joseph
Smadel, that when she injected preparations from those monkey kidneys into hamsters, the
hamsters got cancer. Tumors grew in newborn hamsters at the site of injection; probably a virus
in the monkey cells was causing the cancer.

The story that follows is such a sad one, partly because Smadel himself was a distinguished
scientist, not just a petty bureaucrat...he was not pleased, just after assuming his new post in viral
research, when Eddy threw this time bomb onto his desk: the possibility of a cancer-causing
virus in the polio vaccine. In August he sat down with Eddy, went over her data, and dismissed
the findings as “lumps.”
Eddy tried every possible means to alert her peers to the danger, and ultimately decided she
would “surprise” a meeting of the Cancer Society with her findings.

The Eddy problem landed again on Smadel's desk when, in October of 1960, she gave a talk at
the New York meeting of the Cancer Society. At the meeting she described finding a cancer-
causing virus in the monkey cells from which the polio vaccine was grown.

Smadel hit the roof. “Smadel called me up,” Eddy said, “and if there was anything in the English
language—any awful name—that he could call me, he did. Oh, he was mad. I never saw
anybody so mad.” Smadel wrote Eddy a letter later that day forbidding her to speak in public
again without clearing a written text of her remarks specifically with him. That was just the
beginning.

Eventually, Bernice Eddy lost her labs. In successive measures she was denied permission to
attend scholarly conferences, her papers were held up, and finally she was removed from vaccine
research altogether.

Her treatment became a scandal within the scientific community and was discussed in Senate
hearings.

Bernice Eddy came to a shocking conclusion: an entire generation had been given cancer-
causing monkey viruses. Using this knowledge, she predicted a future epidemic of cancer.

Maurice Hilleman and Benjamin Sweet came to similar conclusions. Sweet and Hilleman were
pharmaceutical researchers for Merck and are credited with first identifying the virus as SV40,
the 40th such simian virus discovered until that point. According to Hilleman:

The discovery of this new virus...raises the important question of the existence of other such
viruses...As shown in this report, all three types of Sabin's live poliovirus vaccine, now fed to
millions of persons of all ages, were contaminated with SV40.

Hilleman and Sweet noted the possibility that it might cause cancer, “especially when
administered to human babies.” According to Sweet:

It was a frightening discovery because, back then, it was not possible to detect the virus with the
testing procedures we had....We had no idea of what this virus would do. First, we knew that
SV40 had oncogenic (cancer-causing) properties in hamsters, which was bad news. Secondly, we
found out that it hybridized with certain DNA viruses...such that [they] would then have SV40
genes attached [to them]....

When we started growing the vaccines, we just couldn't get rid of the SV40-contaminated virus.
We tried to neutralize it, but couldn't....Now, with the theoretical links to HIV and cancer, it just
blows my mind.

Further research uncovered even more disturbing information.

This cancer-causing virus was not only ingested via Sabin's contaminated oral sugar-cube
vaccine, but was directly injected into people's bloodstreams as well. Apparently, SV40 survived
the formaldehyde Salk used to kill microbes that defiles his injectable vaccine.

Experts have estimated that up to 100 million Americans and at least 100 millions others
throughout the world were exposed to SV40 through the polio vaccine. [Bookchin, D., et al.
“Tainted polio vaccine still carries its threat 40 years later. The Boston Globe (January 26, 1997)]

Even though SV40 is universally acknowledged to cause cancer in animal models, strangely
enough its role in causing cancer in humans is still debated. As Wikipedia explains:

The hypothesis that SV40 might cause cancer in humans has been a particularly controversial
area of research. Several different methods have been used to detect SV40 in a variety of human
cancers, although how reliable these detection methods are, and whether SV40 has any role in
causing these tumors, remains unclear.

As a result of these uncertainties, academic opinion remains divided, with some arguing that this
hypothesis is not supported by the data, and others arguing that some cancers may involve SV40.

However, the United States National Cancer Institute announced in 2004 that although SV40
does cause cancer in some animal models, “substantial epidemiological evidence has
accumulated to indicate that SV40 likely does not cause cancer in humans.”

As the Wikipedia article points out, this is in contrast to a 2002 study conducted by The National
Academy of Sciences Immunization Safety Review committee that declared, “The committee
concludes that the biological evidence is moderate that SV40 exposure could lead to cancer in
humans under natural conditions.”

Despite the United States National Cancer Institute's reliance on broad “epidemiological
evidence” that SV40 “likely” does not cause cancer in humans, numerous studies published
throughout the world strongly suggest that SV40 is a catalyst for many types of cancer:

Innis, MD. “Oncogenesis and poliomyelitis vaccine.” Nature 1968;219:972-3.

Soriano, F., et al. “Simian virus 40 in a human cancer.” Nature 1974;249:421-4.

Scherneck, S., et al. “Isolation of a SV-40-like papovavirus from a human glioblastoma.”

Internat J Cancer 1979;24:523-31.

Stoian, M., et al. “Possible relation between viruses and oromaxillofacial tumors. II. Research on
the presence of the SV40 antigen and specific antibodies in patients with oromaxillofacial
tumors.” Virologie 1987;38:35-40.

Bravo, MP., et al. “Association between the occurrence of antibodies to simian vacuolating virus
40 and bladder cancer in male smokers.” Neoplasma 1988;35:285-8.
O'Connell, K., et al. “Endothelial cells transformed by SV40 T-antigen cause Kaposi's sarcoma-
like tumors in nude mice.” American Journal of Pathology 1991;139(4):743-9.

Weiner, LP., et al. “Isolation of virus related to SV40 from patients with progressive multifocal
leukoencephalopathy. New England Journal of Medicine 1972;286:385-90.

Tabuchi, K. “Screening of human brain tumors for SV-40-related T-antigen.” International J of

Cancer 1978;21:12-7.

Meinke, W., et al. “Simian virus 40-related DNA sequences in a human brain tumor.” Neurology
1979;29:1590-4.

Krieg, P., et al. “Episomal simian virus 40 genomes in human brain tumors.” Proceedings of the
National Academy of Science 1981;78:6446-50.

Geissler, E. “SV40 and human brain tumors.” Progress in Medical Virology 1990;37:211-22.

Martini, M., et al. “Human brain tumors and simian virus 40.” J of the National Cancer Institute,
1995;87(17):1331

Lednicky, JA., et al. “Natural simian virus 40 strains are present in human choroid plexus and
ependymoma tumors.” Virology 1995;212(2):710-7

Vilchez, RA., et al. “Association between simian virus 40 and non-Hodgkin lymphoma.” Lancet
(Mar 9, 2002):817-23.

One of the most important researchers and authorities on SV40 is a molecular pathologist at
Chicago's Loyola University Medical Center named Michael Carbone. From the Wikipedia page
of American physician Herbert Ratner:

In 1960 Ratner learned that a government researcher Dr. Bernice Eddy had discovered evidence
of a cancer-causing agent that she described as a vacuolating virus in the Salk vaccine rhesus-
monkey-kidney culture medium.

Dr. Ben Sweet working under Dr. Maurice Hilleman at Merck observed a similar agent in the
same kind of medium that they were using to develop a vaccine for adenovirus. The agent was
later identified as a monkey virus and named Simian Virus 40 (SV40). Sweet & Hilleman
published their work in November 1960 and Eddy published her work in May 1961.

The unused box of 1955 Salk polio vaccine Ratner had placed in his refrigerator remained there
for more than forty years.

In the meantime researchers had begun to discover that SV40 was associated with various
cancers. One of these researchers was Dr. Michele Carbone, a molecular pathologist of Italian
birth and education, then working at the University of Chicago.
Eventually the entire box of remaining vials was given to Carbone in the presence of a lawyer
and witnesses. In these vials Carbone discovered two separate strains of SV40, one of which was
a slow-growing strain previously not known to have been in polio vaccines and for which the
vaccines currently being marketed were not being tested.

Moreover, this slow-growing strain was the same as one found in some types of cancerous
tumors. Had Ratner not saved vials of vaccine, the source of this slow-growing strain would have
been suspected but unproven.

Not only is SV40 showing up in brain tumors and leukemia, but according to research conducted
by Carbone and others, SV40 is being detected in 38% of patients with bone cancer and in 58%
of those with mesothelioma, a deadly type of lung cancer. Carbone's pioneering work indicates
that SV40 blocks an important protein that normally protects cells from becoming malignant.

Carbone, M., et al. “SV40-like sequences in human bone tumors.” Oncogene 1996;13(3):527-35.

Pass, HI., Carbone, M., et al. “Evidence for and implications of SV40-like sequences in human
mesotheliomas and osteosarcomas.” Important Advances in Oncology 1996:89-108.

Rock, A. “The lethal dangers of the billion dollar vaccine business.” Money (December
1996):161.

In 2001, the San Francisco Chronicle published a story called “Rogue virus in the vaccine: Early
polio vaccine harbored virus now feared to cause cancer in humans,” stating:

The discovery of SV40 in human tumors has generated intense debate within the scientific
community, pitting a handful of government health officials, who believe that the virus is
harmless, against researchers from Boston to China who now suspect SV40 may be a human
carcinogen. At stake are millions of research dollars and potential medical treatments for those
afflicted with the cancers SV40 may be causing.

“I believe that SV40 is carcinogenic (in humans),” said Dr. Michele Carbone of Loyola
University Medical Center in Maywood, Ill. “We need to be creating therapies for people who
have these cancers, and now we may be able to because we have a target—SV40.”

But scientists at the National Cancer Institute say their studies show almost no SV40 in human
tumors and no cancer increase in people who received the contaminated vaccine. “No one would
dispute there's been a widespread, very scary exposure to the population of potentially cancer-
causing virus,” said Dr. Howard Strickler, NCI's chief investigator. “But none of our studies and
other major analyses have shown an inkling of an effect on the population.”

Critics charge, however, that the few studies done by the government are scientifically flawed
and that health officials have downplayed the potential risks posed by SV40 ever since they
learned in 1961 that the virus contaminated the polio vaccine and caused tumors in rodents.
“How long can the government ignore this?” asked Dr. Adi Gazdar, a University of Texas
Southwestern Medical Center cancer researcher. “The government has not sponsored any real
research. Here's something possibly affecting millions of Americans, and they're indifferent.
Maybe they don't want to find out.”

In 1998, after a national cancer database was analyzed, it was determined that among those
exposed to SV40 from the polio vaccine, there were 17% more bone cancers, 20% more brain
cancers, and 178% more mesotheliomas. Researchers also found 10 times more osteosarcoma
rates.

Even more alarming, some research suggests that SV40 can be passed from human to human and
form mother to child. A study of nearly 60,000 women found that children of mothers who
received the Salk vaccine in the early 1960s had brain tumors at a rate 13 times greater than
mothers who didn't receive the shot.

Also, a 1996 study published in the journal Cancer Research found SV40 in 23% of blood
samples and 45% of semen taken from healthy subjects. Mauro Tognon, one of the authors of
this study, believes this might explain why brain, bone, and lung cancers are on the rise.

Despite official denials of any correlation between SV40-contaminated polio vaccines and
increased cancer rates, by April 2001, 62 papers from 30 laboratories around the world had
reported SV40 in human tissues and tumors. Even the National Cancer Institute issued a
statement that SV40 “may be associated with human cancer.”

Why the uncertainty? Why the obfuscation? Why the silence? In his book The Health Century,
Edward Shorter asks these questions and quotes an extraordinary statement made by Albert
Sabin:

Was this silence merely the incompetence of the press in the face of a complex scientific
question, or was there a deliberate effort to keep a lid on the story? Albert Sabin was asked thirty
years later why the silence? “I think to release certain information prematurely,” he said, “is not
a public service. There's too much scaring the public unnecessarily. Oh, your children were
injected with a cancer virus and all that. That's not very good.”

Today, the SV40 Cancer Foundation is devoted to raising awareness about a potential link
between the simian virus and human cancer.

The SV40 Cancer Foundation was founded by Raphaele and Michael Horwin. The Horwin's son
Alexander Horwin was born on June 7, 1996 and was given the oral polio vaccine in November
1997. Alexander was diagnosed with medulloblastoma, a malignant brain cancer, leading to his
death on January 31, 1999.

The Horwins contend that the polio vaccine their son ingested was contaminated with SV40,
leading to his death. Four independent PCR tests performed at four separate research institutes
on Alexander's brain tissue demonstrated the presence of the virus.
The Virus and the Vaccine documents the incredible saga of the Horwin family. The vaccine
manufacturer unsuccessfully tried to argue in court that the SV40 contamination was the result of
a trip to the zoo (!), but the Horwin family had overwhelming scientific evidence on their side.

Tragically, although the judge admitted the polio vaccine was the likely origin of the SV40 that
was found in his tumor, the vaccine manufacturer was exonerated because their equipment was
insufficient and unable to offer 100% certainty that the product would be SV40-free.

One of the most important reasons this subject needs to be thoroughly studied is that traditional
methods of cancer treatment such as chemotherapy may make SV40-related cancers worse:

It is well documented that SV40 binds with tumor suppressor genes p53 and RB. These genes
and their proteins are needed to drive a damaged cell towards apoptosis—programmed cell
death. Apoptosis is a critical cellular function that stops the growth of tumors in man.

Cell-killing or cytotoxic therapies like chemotherapy and radiation utilize apoptosis. These
therapies cause cellular DNA damage such as point mutations, strand breaks, and other
disturbances to a cell’s DNA. This DNA damage, in turn, triggers the apoptosis which leads to
cell death. In this way, chemo and radiation kill cells (cancer cells and healthy cells).

However, when the large T antigen (Tag) of SV40 is present in a cancer cell it binds p53 and RB
and stops these genes from working. There is no apoptosis. The result is that chemo and radiation
kill healthy cells, but the cancerous cells infected with SV40’s Tag live on with even more
mutations.

This means that standard cancer therapies may only make a SV40 cancer more abnormal and
aggressive and less responsive to standard cytotoxic therapies.

Knowing this, you would think that a patient who is diagnosed with a cancer associated with
SV40 (i.e. brain cancers, mesothelioma, bone cancers, Non-Hodgkins Lymphoma, and thyroid
cancers) would have their cancer tested for the presence of this virus. And, if the virus is present,
the patient would be offered rational therapies.

Unfortunately, this is not the case. There are no prospective tests or trials in which SV40 status is
used in clinical decision-making. Instead, tumors are tested often after a patient has died to
determine whether it contained SV40. At this point, there is no benefit to the patient.

SV40 is a problem that federal government authorities have not addressed responsibly because
the government’s own vaccine programs are responsible for the spread of the virus throughout
the western world. Federal authorities are so concerned about being blamed for unleashing a
cancer-causing monkey virus that they would rather ignore its role in cancer than take the
appropriate steps to develop rational therapies.

From Polio to Smallpox and HIV to AIDS

If the WHO's smallpox vaccination campaign triggered an AIDS epidemic in Africa, how did so
many people get infected with HIV in the first place?

SV40 was just one of many simian viruses known to have contaminated polio vaccines.

Hilary Koprowski, who is about to be featured heavily in this story, wrote a letter to the
Congressional Health and Safety Subcommittee in 1961 saying:

As monkey kidney culture is host to innumerable simian viruses, the number found varying in
relation to the amount of work expended to find them, the problem presented to the manufacturer
is considerable, if not insuperable. As our technical methods improve we may find fewer and
fewer lots of vaccine which can be called free from simian virus.

According to Ronald Desrosier, a professor at Harvard Medical School, growing polio vaccine in
monkey kidneys is “a ticking time bomb.”

Desrosier acknowledges that you can test monkeys before using their tissue and screen out those
carrying harmful viruses. But he warns that you can test only for those viruses you know about—
and that our knowledge is limited to perhaps “2% of existing monkey viruses.”

During the 1950s-70s, virus detection techniques were crude and unreliable. It wasn't until the
1980s that more sophisticated testing procedures were developed.

That was when researchers discovered that about 50% of all African green monkeys—the
primate of choice for making polio vaccines—were infected with simian immunodeficieny virus
(SIV), a virus closely related to human immunodeficieny virus (HIV), the infectious agent
thought to precede AIDS.

Essex, M., et al. “The origin of the AIDS virus” Scientific American 1988;259:64-71.

Karpas, A. “Origin and spread of AIDS.” Nature 1990;348:578

Kyle, WS. “Simian retroviruses, poliovaccine, and origin of AIDS.” Lancet 1992;339:600-1.

Elswood, BF., Stricker, RB. “Polio vaccines and the origin of AIDS.” Medical Hypothesis
1994:42:347-54

From the last study: “We hypothesize that the AIDS pandemic may have originated with a
contaminated polio vaccine that was administered to inhabitants of Equatorial Africa from 1957
to 1959.”

This has caused some researchers to wonder if HIV may simply be SIV “residing in and adapting
to a human host.” This led others to wonder if SIV mutated into HIV once introduced into the
human population by way of contaminated polio vaccines.
Martin, B. “Polio vaccines and the origin of AIDS: the career of a threatening idea.” Townsend
Letter for Doctors (January 1994):97-100.

Curtis, T. “The origin of AIDS: A startling new theory attempts to answer the question 'Was it an
act of God or an act of man?'” Rolling Stone (March 19, 1992):57.

“Workshop on simian virus-40 (SV-40): A possible human polyomavirus.” NVIC (Jan 27-28,
1997).

Curtis, T. “Did polio vaccine experiment unleash AIDS in Africa?” The Washington Post (April
5, 1992):C3+.

Vaccine authorities were so concerned about the possibility that SIV was a precursor to HIV, and
that polio vaccines were the means of transmission from monkey to human, that the World
Health Organization convened two meetings of experts in 1985 to explore the data and consider
their options. After all, SIV was very similar to HIV and occurred naturally in the monkey
species predominantly used by vaccine manufacturers.

However, WHO concluded the vaccines were safe enough and insisted the mass vaccination
campaigns continue. By 1989, they recommended not making the polio vaccine using monkeys
infected with SIV.

The following year, wild chimpanzees in Africa were found to be infected with a strain of SIV
that was almost identical to HIV. Some researchers even referred to it as the “missing link” to the
origins of HIV.

Since chimpanzees were used to test viruses for potential use in vaccines, and were kept in
captivity by research laboratories, they could have been a source of vaccine contamination.

Scientific concerns were also heightened when researchers found some West Africans who were
infected with an SIV-like virus that was a fundamental twin to HIV. They called it HIV-2, and
like the initial HIV subtype, it was implicated in the development of AIDS.

According to Robert Gallo: “The monkey virus is the human virus. There are monkey viruses as
close to isolates of HIV-2 as HIV-2 isolates are to each others.”

By 1991, as the result of improvements in virus-detection techniques, researchers found SIV

DNA in the kidneys of infected monkeys. Minced monkey kidneys were, and still are, used to
produce the live polio vaccine.

SIV was also found in the cancer cells of an AIDS victim, and in other people as well. To many
researchers, this trail of evidence had become too persuasive to deny. Apparently, millions of
people were infected with monkey viruses capable of causing AIDS, and this cross-species
transfer very likely occurred by way of SIV-contaminated polio vaccines.

Giunta, S., et al. “The primate trade and the origin of AIDS virus.” Nature 1987;329:22.
Seale, J. “Crossing the species barrier—viruses and the origins of AIDS in perspective.” J R Soc
Med 1989;82:519-23.

Lecatsas, G. “Origin of AIDS.” Nature 1991;351:179.

Gilks, C. “AIDS, monkeys and malaria” Nature 1991;354:262.

Since most historians agree that AIDS originated in Africa, how could it be linked to the polio
vaccine if Salk and Sabin's trials were conducted in the U.S., the Soviet Union and Eastern
Europe?

In March 1951, several years before Drs. Jonas Salk and Albert Sabin would scuffle over whose
vaccine was the true prophylactic, Dr. Hilary Koprowski announced at a medical conference that
he had become the first doctor in history to test polio vaccine on humans. His “volunteers”
included several institutionalized children with mental handicaps. They drank the vaccine in
chocolate milk.

From 1957 to 1960, after years of tinkering with monkey kidneys and polio germs, Koprowski
tested his own experimental polio vaccine on 325,000 equatorial Africans, including 75,000
citizens of Leopoldville, Belgian Congo (now Kinshasa, Zaire).

Called by drums, rural natives traveled to local villages where they had a liquid vaccines squirted
into their mouths. 98% of the vaccine recipients were infants and toddlers. The youngest children
received 15 times the adult dosage. Though Koprowski claimed he had the backing of the World
Health Organization, WHO denied sanctioning the large-scale trials.

In 1959, Albert Sabin published a study that claimed that Koprowski's polio vaccine used in the
African trials contained un “unidentified” and “unstable” cell-killing virus. Although he was
quick to point out the flaws in the vaccine of Koprowski, his professional rival, unfortunately his
ability to detect viruses in the polio vaccine fell short when it came to mass contamination of
Sabin's own polio vaccine with SV-40.

In response to Sabin's claims of contamination, Koprowski simply scoffed at him and said he
was just trying to discredit his work (as he would do again and again to anyone making this
accusation). The virus allegedly detected by Sabin was never identified.

Until recently, the earliest known blood sample containing antibodies against HIV was traced
back to 1959. The serum came from a patient visiting a clinic in Leopoldville, one of the
epicenters of the AIDS epidemic that would occur a decade later.

Gerald Myers, a genetic sequencing expert with Los Alamos National Laboratories in New
Mexico, tracked the evolution of HIV and confirmed that today's major subtypes of the AIDS
virus in humans appear to have arisen as recently as 1960.

Although this time period is widely accepted by medical researchers, more recent conflicting
reports suggest that the first HIV infection may have occurred years earlier.
Regardless of when the first HIV infection occurred, it would seem to be premature to dismiss
the OPV (Oral Polio Vaccine) AIDS hypothesis on this basis alone. The timing of the first HIV
infection is irrelevant to the question of whether or not some doses of the experimental polio
vaccine used in Africa in the late 1950s were contaminated, thus precipitating a future outbreak.

Koprowski's vaccine was not approved for human use, so it was discontinued in 1960 following
the African trials. Thus, it was only administered to inhabitants of the Belgian Congo, Rwanda
and Burundi—the precise area where high levels of HIV infection were identified by researcher
30 years later.

Furthermore, the AIDS virus is known to infect mucous cells, prevalent in the mouth. The
African vaccines were squirted into people's mouths.

Could squirting an HIV-contaminated polio vaccine into people's mouths cause AIDS?
According to Tom Folks, chief retrovirologist at the CDC, “Any time a person has a lesion in his
mouth, then there could be transmission” of the virus.

Dr. Robert Bohannon of Baylor College of Medicine asserts that squiring polio vaccines into
one's mouth would tend to aerosolize some of the liquid. Small drops could then go into the
lungs, and from there to the blood cells susceptible to infection. This could be an efficient mode
of HIV transmission.

Experts believe that the average time between HIV infection and the development of AIDS is
approximately 8-10 years.

If the African polio vaccine was indeed contaminated with SIV/HIV, initial outbreaks of AIDS
would have occurred from the mid-1960s to early 1970s. This period accurately coincides with
the emergence of AIDS in equatorial Africa.

Understandably, authorities are very reluctant to admit that there's even a possibility that
scientists may have contributed to the AIDS pandemic by growing polio vaccines in virus-laden
monkey kidneys.

In 1992, Tom Curtis published a story for Rolling Stone that created quite a stir.

Although dismissed by most experts, “a few scientists, notably the biologist W.D. Hamilton,
thought the hypothesis required serious investigation, but they received little support from the
scientific community.”

William Haseltine, a professor at Harvard, believes that hypothesizing about the origin of AIDS
is distracting and nonproductive, saying, “It's not relevant...I'm not interested in discussing it.”
Dr. David Heymann, head of the WHO's Global Program of AIDS, stated that “the origin of the
AIDS virus is of no importance to science today.”

Jonas Salk wouldn't comment on the possibility, as apparently he was too busy working on an
AIDS vaccine, and Sabin's response was “you can't hang Koprowski with that.” Koprowski
himself initially dismissed the idea with a laugh, and then later said that “this is a highly
theoretical situation.”

His amusement must not have lasted long, because Koprowski sued Curtis and Rolling Stone for
“...the destruction of (his) professional and personal reputation, for mental and emotional
suffering, and for...humiliation and embarrassment.” As a result the magazine was ordered to pay
$1 in damages. [See The Seeds of Doom by Christian Biasco]

However, both Tom Folks of the CDC and Robert Gallo thought testing the seed stocks of polio
might be a good idea. According to Folks, “any time we can learn more about the natural history
[of AIDS], it helps us understand the pathogenesis and...the transmission.”

Gallo believes that questions like this “are of more than academic interest because answering
them may help avoid future zoonitic catastrophes—that is, transmission of disease from lower
animals to humans.”

Responding to these concerns, some AIDS researchers formally requested samples of the
original polio vaccine seed stocks. But the government would neither release nor test them
because there are “only a small number of vials” of the material, and tests “might use it all up.”

Inspired by Curtis' investigative report, a British writer named Edward Hooper traveled in
Africa, Europe, and the United States for seven years. As a result of his research, he published a
book in 1999 called The River: A Journey to the Source of HIV and AIDS.

Although the scientific community generally rejects the OPV AIDS hypothesis, Hooper
“criticizes the research and conduct of many of the scientists involved in the investigation and
alleges a 'very substantial cover-up' took place to silence the hypothesis.”

One of the several arguments against the hypothesis was that Koprowski was not using
chimpanzees in his experiments, and therefore HIV contamination didn't occur. However,
eyewitness testimony suggests otherwise.

In 2004, The Origins of AIDS, a French TV documentary strongly supportive of the OPV
hypothesis, appeared on several television stations around the world.

The film offers a convincing case for the hypothesis, and seriously challenges the questionable
nature of the categorical denials by Koprowski and others that no chimpanzees were used in the
development of his experimental vaccine.

AIDS in America
Although Koprowski's experiment may have contributed to the rise of AIDS in Africa, what
might have contributed to the spread of the disease to the homosexual community in America?

In 1974, clinics in New York and California began experimental treatments for gay men afflicted
with herpes. Therapy consisted of multiple doses of the live polio vaccine.
The vaccine was produced in the kidneys of the African Green monkey, a known reservoir for
SIV, a likely precursor to HIV.

Beginning in the early 1980s, simultaneous outbreaks of Kaposi sarcoma and serious
opportunistic infections (later associated with AIDS) were reported among homosexual men,
especially in New York City, San Francisco, and Los Angeles. This time span coincides with the
average incubation period between HIV infections and the development of AIDS.

In 1982, the CDC concluded that such outbreaks “strongly suggests the occurrence of a single
epidemic of underlying immunosuppression....” The next year, HIV was identified as the
causative agent.

In 1992, Lancet (http://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PII0140-

6736%2892%2990876-5/fulltext) published the first scientific explanation showing how
repeated doses of SIV-contaminated polio vaccines may have seeded HIV among American
homosexual men.

In the 1980s, hundreds of people diagnosed with AIDS had no identified risk factor, in other
words, they didn't engage in risky behaviors associated with AIDS infection. Many children were
listed as NIR. Some parents even claimed that HIV-contaminated polio vaccines infected their
children.

On February 12, 1994, Bruce Williams filed a civil suit against the American Cyanamid
Company, claiming its polio vaccine caused his daughter's illness. The suit alleges that “the live
oral poliovirus vaccine was produced, tested, and approved by the United States Food and Drug
Administration pursuant to measures inconsistent with accepted standards of medical practice.”

The lawsuit also asserts that “the product was FDA approved despite the known presence of
contaminants, including retroviruses such as HIV.”

The Williams' lawyer even identified the specific lots of vaccine the child received, but the CDC
and federal health officials refused to test them. According to their lawyer, “The CDC could
disprove my entire hypothesis by testing the vaccines they have in their possession. The fact that
they haven't done so is evidence there's something wrong with the vaccine.”

How Now, Mad Cow

Bovine spongiform encephalopathy (BSE), or mad cow disease, was first noticed in the mid-
1980s. Mad cow disease is a progressive nerve disorder of cattle that's similar to scrapie, a
disease that affects sheep.

Authorities believe it spread to cows from sheep when they were fed scrapie-infected bone meal.
Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease (CJD and vCJD (a newly discovered variant) are the human
equivalents of mad cow disease. They cause a comparable wasting of the brain leading to muscle
incoordination, sensory loss, and mental confusion. It is always fatal.
Mad cow disease and the newly discovered variant of Creutzfeldt-Jakob may be caused by the
same infectious agent. A study published in Nature showed that monkeys injected with BSE
developed very similar symptoms to vCJD. They also have similar molecular characteristics.

Mad cow disease can be passed from cows to humans if they ingest BSE-infected beef, or if they
receive vaccines contaminated with BSE.

BSE-associated infectious agents are capable of contaminating polio vaccines because polio
vaccines are not only grown in monkey kidneys, but in calf serum as well. In fact, many parts of
the cow are used in vaccine production. Glycerol is derived from cow fat; gelatin and amino
acids come from cow bones; and the growth medium for viruses and other microorganism may
require cow skeletal muscle, enzymes, and blood.

Authorities knew that vaccines could be infected with BSE-associated transmissible agents as
early as 1988. Yet, in England, vaccine manufacturers waited months before switching to cows
less likely to be infected and refused to removed current stock off the shelves and out of doctor's
offices until it was all sold, or expired five years later toward the end of 1993.

According to one British legislator, “The Department of Health was potentially criminally
negligent in not requiring the immediate withdrawal or cessation of use of vaccines from
potentially contaminated sources. It is also beyond belief the Department should not even have
monitored those who were injected, and is now trying to sweep the whole thing under the
carpet.”

Finally, in October 2000, the Department of Health became so concerned about the likelihood of
of children being infected with BSE-contaminated vaccines and falling prey to vCreutzfeldt-
Jakob disease—dozens of people, including children, had already contracted it—that they issued
a recall of hundreds of thousands of polio vaccines made using fetal bovine serum extracted from
British cows.

In the United States, the FDA issued a “warning” to manufacturers in 1996 instructing them to
“take whatever steps are necessary to reduce potential risk of transmission of BSE agent.” By
2000, the FDA realized that its “recommendations” were being ignored, for vaccines were still
being made in bovine materials from countries reporting BSE. These vaccines wouldn't be
removed from the market until 2002, when all existing stock had been purchased.

Although cows in America don't exhibit “mad cow symptoms,” tens of thousands of cattle are
severely incapacitated each year in what some have suggested may be related to BSE. These
“downed” animals have not been ruled out of vaccine production by the FDA.

Dr. Richard Marsh of the Department of Animal Health and Biomedical Sciences at the
University of Wisconsin, Madison, conducted research providing evidence that down cattle in
the U.S. may harbor a new variant of mad cow disease. He inoculated cows with TME, a variant
of BSE. They became “downed” instead of “mad.”
Other scientists inoculated cows with scrapie from U.S. sheep. They, too, became “downed”
instead of “mad.”

According to Farm Sanctuary, a national non-profit organization dedicated to preventing

irresponsible agricultural practices, “We are concerned that, like in Britain, there is a powerful
economic incentive to ignore evidence that BSE, or a variant of BSE, exists in the U.S.”
Influencing Influenza
Originally developed in the 1940s, the influenza vaccine is strongly encouraged for nearly
everyone over the age of 6 months. About 170 million doses were expected to be produced for
the U.S. market during the 2015/2016 flu season, compared to 32 million in 1990.

Annual vaccination against seasonal influenza reduces protective immunity against more virulent
strains. People who are naturally exposed to circulating influenza viruses (the unvaccinated)
frequently gain cross-protection against other strains of the disease.

Vaccinated people are denied this benefit.

Preventing infection with seasonal influenza viruses by vaccination might prevent the induction
of heterosubtypic immunity to pandemic strains, which might be a disadvantage to
immunologically naive people--eg, infants.

Prior receipt of 2008-09 TIV trivalent inactivated influenza vaccine was associated with
increased risk of medically attended pH1N1 illness during the spring-summer 2009.

These findings may have implications for the general recommendation to vaccinate all healthy
children against seasonal influenza.

Annual vaccination may hamper the development of cross-reactive immunity against influenza A
viruses of novel subtypes, that would otherwise be induced by natural infection.

The CDC policy of vaccinating pregnant women is not supported by science. Pregnant women
vaccinated against seasonal influenza and A-H1N1 swine flu had high rates of spontaneous
abortions.

The ACIP's recommendation of influenza vaccination during pregnancy is not supported by

citations in its own policy paper (pdf) or in current medical literature. Considering the potential
risks of maternal and fetal mercury exposure, the administration of thimerosal during pregnancy
is both unjustified and unwise.

The current season's influenza vaccine will not work in people who also received the previous
season's vaccine:

In vaccinated subjects with no evidence of prior season vaccination, significant protection (62%)
against community-acquired influenza was demonstrated. Substantially lower effectiveness was
noted among subjects who were vaccinated in both the current and prior season. There was no
evidence that vaccination prevented household transmission once influenza was introduced;
adults were at particular risk despite vaccination.

The influenza vaccine is not very effective, causes adverse reactions, and can spread disease to
other people. This study (pdf) analyzed 18 years of data and concluded that the influenza vaccine
has little or no effectiveness for preventing influenza cases, hospital admissions, or deaths.
Another study determined that “the manufacturers' refusal to release all safety outcome data from
trials carried out in young children, together with obvious reporting bias and inconsistencies in
the primary studies does not bode well for a fair assessment of the safety of live attenuated
vaccines.”

Although this assessment determined the flu vaccine was efficacious in children over 2, it also
noted that "no studies assessed reductions in mortality, serious complications, and community
transmission of influenza," and that if "influenza immunization in children is to be recommended
as public-health policy, large-scale studies assessing such important outcomes and undertaking
direct comparisons of vaccines are urgently needed."

Children who receive an inactivated influenza vaccine are significantly more likely than non-
vaccinated children to be hospitalized:

We found a threefold increased risk of hospitalization in subjects who did get trivalent
inactivated influenza vaccine.

Children vaccinated against seasonal influenza are more likely to develop respiratory virus
infections.

Handwashing and teaching proper hygiene may be more effective than vaccines at reducing the
spread of influenza and other respiratory viruses:

The disparity in effectiveness between the high profile of influenza vaccines and antivirals and
the low profile of physical interventions is striking. Public health recommendations are almost
completely based on the use of vaccines and antivirals despite a lack of strong evidence.

We could not correlate increasing vaccination coverage after 1980 with declining mortality rates
in any age group...we conclude that observational studies substantially overestimate vaccination
benefit.

There is no unbiased scientific evidence that influenza vaccines improve death rates in the
elderly.

Vaccinating healthcare workers against influenza to protect their elderly patients is not effective:

Vaccinating healthcare workers who care for those aged 60 or over in long-term institutions
showed no effect on laboratory-proven influenza or complications.

Mandatory vaccination for healthcare workers to protect their patients is not supported by
science:

The studies aiming to prove the widespread belief that healthcare worker vaccination decreases
patient morbidity and mortality are heavily flawed and the recommendations for vaccination
biased.
Influenza vaccine studies and their conclusions rarely match the actual data that is in those
studies:

Most of our studies (70%) were of poor quality with overoptimistic conclusions—that is, not
supported by the data presented. Those sponsored by industry had greater visibility as they were
more likely to be published by high impact factor journals and were likely to be given higher
prominence by the international scientific and lay media.

There is no good evidence that vaccines reduce serious complications of influenza. Moreover,
promotional messages conflate "influenza" (disease caused by influenza viruses) with "flu" (a
syndrome with many causes, of which influenza viruses appear to be a minor contributor).

This lack of precision causes physicians and potential vaccine recipients to have unrealistic
assumptions about the vaccine's potential benefit, and impedes dissemination of the evidence on
nonpharmaceutical interventions against respiratory diseases. In addition, there are potential
vaccine-related harms, as unexpected and serious adverse effects of influenza vaccines have
occurred.

Closer examination of influenza vaccine policies shows that although proponents employ the
rhetoric of science, the studies underlying the policy are often of low quality, and do not
substantiate officials’ claims. The vaccine might be less beneficial and less safe than has been
claimed, and the threat of influenza appears overstated.

Are US flu death figures more PR than science?

US data on influenza deaths are a mess. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC)
acknowledges a difference between flu death and flu associated death yet uses the terms
interchangeably.

Additionally, there are significant statistical incompatibilities between official estimates and
national vital statistics data. Compounding these problems is a marketing of fear—a CDC
communications strategy in which medical experts “predict dire outcomes” during flu seasons.
Pushing Pertussis
The first pertussis vaccine was introduced in the 1930's to treat whooping cough.

The recent resurgence in pertussis infections is put down to a combination of waning immunity
and new mutations in the pathogen that existing vaccines are unable to effectively control.

The pertussis vaccine has encouraged evolutionary adaptation, permitting virulent vaccine-
resistant strains of pertussis to emerge.

People who are vaccinated against pertussis may be silent carriers of the disease and capable of
infecting others. For example, baboons vaccinated against pertussis became carriers and spread
the disease.

Because people who are vaccinated against pertussis can still spread the disease, herd immunity
and eradication are virtually unattainable:

Asymptomatic transmission is the most parsimonious explanation for many of the observations
surrounding the resurgence of B. pertussis in the US and UK. These results have important
implications for B. pertussis vaccination policy and present a complicated scenario for achieving
herd immunity and B. pertussis eradication.

Fully-vaccinated children are still susceptible to pertussis:

Pertussis has increased in the U.S. since the 1980s despite high coverage with pertussis
childhood vaccines. Protection from the DtaP series beings to wane after vaccination,
contributing to the accumulation of vaccinated individuals who are still susceptible to disease.

Since protection after vaccination wanes within 2 to 4 years, “lack of long-term protection after
vaccination is contributing to increases in pertussis among adolescents.”

New strains of pertussis toxins have emerged subsequent to pertussis vaccination:

Global transmission of new strains is very rapid and the worldwide population of B. pertussis is
evolving in response to vaccine introduction.

The vaccine is not effective against these virulent new strains:

Vaccines designed to reduce pathogen growth rate and/or toxicity may result in the evolution of
pathogens with higher levels of virulence...waning immunity and pathogen adaptation have
contributed to the resurgence of pertussis.

Since Pertussis has “no non-human hosts or environmental niche, vaccine-mediated immunity is
the most likely selective pressure against Bordetella pertussis.”
Significant changes in B. pertussis populations have been observed after the introduction of
vaccinations, suggesting a role for pathogen adaptation in the persistence and resurgence of
pertussis.

Pertussis vaccine failures are due to genetic changes in pertussis strains and poor efficacy, not
because too many people are unvaccinated.

When the acellular pertussis vaccine (DtaP) replaced the whole cell pertussis vaccines (DTP) in
the 1990s, the World Health Organization created an official standard method to define cases of
pertussis.

The new definition was excessively restrictive, requiring laboratory confirmation and at least 21
days of paroxysmal cough. As a result, legitimate cases of pertussis were eliminated and the
efficacy of the vaccine was artificially inflated.

The universal use of pertussis vaccines has been associated with genetic changes in circulating B.
pertussis strains...with DTaP vaccines, genetic change should be a major concern regarding
vaccine efficacy.

Acellular pertussis vaccines are designed to protect against pertactin, however, pertactin-negative
mutations have emerged in Japan, France, Finland, Australia and the United States.

DtaP vaccination to protect children from B. pertussis increases their risk of whooping cough
from B. parapertussis.

B. parapertussis infections contribute significantly to the overall pertussis burden and contribute
to the pool of children thought to have vaccine failure.

Another study concluded that "aP vaccination interferes with the optimal clearance of B.
parapertussis and enhances the performance of this pathogen," resulting in "an approximately
40-fold increase in B. parapertussis lung colony-forming units."

Pertussis vaccines also do not protect against whooping cough caused by B. holmesii.

The imperfect immunity given by pertussis vaccines is causing outbreaks of whooping cough in
highly vaccinated populations:

The fact that populations of B. pertussis may have evolved to circumvent the immune responses
elicited by vaccination and to alter their virulence levels raises a number of questions concerning
the design and use of future vaccines.
Hyping HPV
Human papillomavirus is a sexually-transmitted virus with more than 100 subtypes. Although
most infections cause no symptoms and resolute spontaneously, in some cases they can result in
precancerous lesions.

In 2006, the FDA approved a new HPV vaccine for 9 to 26-year-old women. The vaccine
protects against 4 of the 100 strains of HPV. Another HPV vaccine, produced by a U.K.
manufacturer, is also available in many parts of the world.

Young teenage girls have no risk of dying from cervical cancer, but they gamble with
permanently disabling autoimmune or degenerative disorders, or death, following their HPV
vaccines:

The present study provides epidemiological evidence supporting a significant relationship

between HPV4 vaccine administration and serious autoimmune adverse events.

For example, women diagnosed with systemic lupus erythematosus, a serious autoimmune
disease, were 5 times more likely that controls to have received the HPV vaccine (odds ratio,
OR=5.3).

Women diagnosed with alopecia (OR=8.3), gastroenteritis (OR=4.6), vasculitis (OR=4.0), and
central nervous system conditions (OR=1.8) were also significantly more likely than controls to
have received the HPV vaccine.

Based on the current data, a causal link between HPV vaccination and onset or relapse of
systemic lupus erythematosus is plausible.

Death after Quadrivalent Human Papillomavirus Vaccination: Causal or Coincidental? (pdf)

Our study suggests that HPV vaccines containing HPV-16L1 antigens pose an inherent risk for
triggering potentially fatal auto-immune vasulopathies.

The HPV vaccine has been linked to chronic pain, fatigue and nervous system damage:

Adverse reactions appear to be more frequent after HPV vaccination when compared to other
type of immunizations. Clinicians should be aware of the possible association between HPV
vaccination and the development of these difficult to diagnose painful dysautonomic syndromes.

Chronic fatigue syndrome/myalgic encephalomyelitis may be a suitable diagnosis for patients

with severe and persistent suspected side effects to the quadrivalent HPV vaccine. (pdf)

Damage to the autonomic nervous system has been consistently reported after HPV vaccination,
causing muscle weakness, pain, fatigue, and menstrual problems.
A relatively high incidence of chronic limb pain, frequently complicated by violent, tremulous
involuntary movements, has been noted in Japanese girls following HPV vaccination.

Some girls develop premature ovarian insufficiency after HPV vaccination, which may affect
childbearing. Current HPV vaccine safety research is inadequate to determine ovarian safety.

Further work is urgently needed to elucidate the potential for a causal link between the vaccine
and circulatory abnormalities and to establish targeted treatment options for the affected patients.

The HPV vaccine may cause autoimmunity and ovarian failure:

We documented here the evidence of the potential of the HPV vaccine to trigger a life-disabling
autoimmune condition. The increasing number of similar reports of post HPV vaccine-linked
autoimmunity and the uncertainty of long-term clinical benefits of HPV vaccination are a matter
of public health that warrants further rigorous inquiry.

Clinical trials and marketing tactics by the HPV vaccine manufacturer may not be trustworthy:

The poor design of existing vaccine safety and efficacy trials may be reflective of the fact that in
the past two decades the pharmaceutical industry has gained unprecedented control over the
evaluation of its own products.

Coercive tactics such as vaccine mandates that are supported solely by vaccine manufactures'
own data is unacceptable.

The HPV vaccine manufacturer aggressively lobbied legislators to mandate their vaccine for
school entry, drafted the legislation, provided the science, and made financial contributions to
lawmakers.

There is no significant evidence showing that HPV vaccination can prevent cervical cancer, and
the long-term benefits are based on assumptions, not reliable research data:

Current worldwide HPV immunization practices appear to be neither justified by long-term

health benefits nor economically viable, nor is there any evidence that HPV vaccination (even if
proven effective against cervical cancer) would reduce the rate of cervical cancer beyond what
Pap screening has already achieved.

The FDA licensed the HPV vaccine based on safety and efficacy studies that were designed,
sponsored and conducted by the vaccine manufacturer.

We find that HPV vaccine clinical trials design, and data interpretation of both efficacy and
safety outcomes, were largely inadequate. Additionally, we note evidence of selective reporting
of results from clinical trials. Given this, the widespread optimism regarding HPV vaccines long-
term benefits appears to rest on a number of unproven assumptions and significant
misinterpretation of available data.
Likewise, the notion that HPV vaccines have an impressive safety profile is only supported by
highly flawed design of safety trials and is contrary to accumulating evidence from vaccine
safety surveillance databases and case reports which continue to link HPV vaccination to serious
adverse outcomes (including death and permanent disabilities).

We thus conclude that further reduction of cervical cancers might be best achieved by optimizing
cervical screening (which carries no such risks) and targeting other factors of the disease rather
than by the reliance on vaccines with questionable efficacy and safety profiles.

HPV vaccine safety and efficacy claims are at odds with factual evidence:

Whilst 12-year-old preadolescents are at zero risk of dying from cervical cancer, they are faced
with a risk of death and a permanently disabling lifelong autoimmune or neurodegenerative
condition from a vaccine that thus far has not prevented a single case of cervical cancer, let alone
cervical cancer death.
Selling Varicella
Chickenpox is a contagious disease caused by infection with varicella zoster virus.

Before the chickenpox vaccine was introduced in 1995, it was common for doctors to
recommend exposing children to the disease because it is generally benign in childhood and
complication rates increase when it is contracted by teenagers or adults.

When people regain their health after contracting chickenpox, the virus remains dormant in the
body. Later, when immunity weakens, the virus can become active again and cause shingles, also
known as herpes zoster.

Immunity against shingles is strengthened by periodic exposures to the varicella virus. Before the
chickenpox vaccine, frequent encounters with the varicella virus boosted antibody protection
against shingles. Although chickenpox cases decreased after the introduction of the vaccine, this
restricted opportunities to reinforce immunity and increased the rate of shingles.

Medical costs, pain, and suffering associated with shingles generally are much greater than with
chickenpox. To address this problem, the maker of the chickenpox vaccine, Merck & Co. has
developed and released a shingles vaccine.

In addition to causing a dramatic rise in shingles, the vaccine becomes less effective as rates
increase. This is due to a reduction in opportunities for natural boosts to immunity which occur
from exposure to people who are shedding the wild varicella virus.

In the prelicensure era, 95% of adults experienced natural chickenpox (usually as children)--
these cases were usually benign and resulted in long-term immunity. Varicella vaccination is less
effective than the natural immunity that existed in prevaccine communities.

Universal varicella vaccination has not proven to be cost-effective as increased herpes zoster
morbidity has disproportionately offset cost savings associated with reductions in varicella
disease. Universal varicella vaccination has failed to provide long-term protection from varicella
zoster virus disease.

In addition, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) sponsored and promoted
studies that showed positive outcomes of varicella vaccination but opposed, and attempted to
block, publication of findings that were critical of the vaccination program.
Measles Mania
Measles is a contagious disease caused by a virus that affects the respiratory system, skin and
eyes.

Complications from the disease are unlikely, and previously healthy children usually recover
without incident. However, measles can be dangerous in populations newly exposed to the virus
and in malnourished children living in undeveloped countries.

A measles vaccine was introduced in the 1960's, and it was combined with vaccines for mumps
and rubella in a single MMR shot.

People who are vaccinated against measles can still get the disease, and measles can be
transmitted from a fully vaccinated person to other fully vaccinated individuals.

Measles vaccine failures cause outbreaks of the disease, raising “important questions concerning
the relative contributions of vaccine failure versus failure to vaccinate.”

Loss of immunity after receiving the MMR vaccine, combined with viral shedding, may spread
disease and prevent herd immunity:

If wild virus can be spread via individuals with subclinical infections, it is doubtful whether
population immunity (herd immunity), which is necessary to eliminate the three diseases, can be
attained in large populations.

Fevers induced by measles vaccination are related to the replication and shedding of the live
vaccine virus, “showing that subcutaneous injection of an attenuated measles strain can result in
respiratory excretion of this virus.”

Only molecular genotyping can distinguish between wild-type and vaccine-related disease.

Emergency room visits are significantly more common in children who recently received the
MMR vaccine:

There are significantly elevated risks of primarily emergency room visits approximately one to
two weeks following 12 and 18 month vaccination.

Young children have an increased risk of requiring emergency care after MMR. This is
especially true for girls, who “may have an increased reactogenicity to the MMR vaccine.”

Vaccine-related deaths have been associated with mumps as well, as a study has observed
"devastating neurological complications associated with the detection of live-attenuated mumps
virus in the brain of a child."
A toddler who developed severe neurological symptoms including blindness associated with
chronic encephalitis and died following MMR vaccination was found to have vaccine-derived
mumps virus in his brain.

Contracting diseases like measles and mumps naturally in childhood may have lifelong health
benefits, including a significant protection against heart attacks and strokes during adulthood:

Measles and mumps, especially in case of both infections, were associated with lower risks of
mortality from cardiovascular disease.

The results of this study may be explained by the hygiene hypothesis, which proposes that
infections suffered during childhood are necessary for normal development of the immune
system.

Many autistic children have elevated levels of antibodies to the measles virus but not to other
viruses. “An inappropriate antibody response to MMR, specifically the measles component
thereof, might be related to pathogenesis of autism.” As a result, a large number of autism cases
may stem from neurological symptoms due to an atypical measles virus infections following
MMR vaccination.

Also review: Physicians for Informed Consent Finds MMR Vaccine Causes Seizures in 5,700
U.S. Children Annually

https://physiciansforinformedconsent.org/news/physicians-informed-consent-finds-mmr-vaccine-
causes-seizures-5700-u-s-children-annually/