Tuesday, December 30, 2014

17 CHILDREN DIE AFTER RECEIVING HEPATITIS B VACCINE



Source Article by Dr. Mercola:
17 Children Die After Receiving Hepatitis B Vaccine
http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2014/01/07/infant-hepatitis-b-vaccine.aspx

Over a period of two months, eight infants in China died within hours, and in some cases minutes, of receiving hepatitis B vaccines

Nine other deaths among Chinese children aged 5 and younger were also recently reported following hepatitis B vaccination

Six of the deaths occurred in infants who had received the vaccine made by Shenzhen Kangtai Biological Products, while two occurred after hepatitis B vaccine produced by drug maker Beijing Tiantan Biological Products

Health authorities in China have since launched an investigation and have suspended the use of millions of doses of hepatitis B vaccine made by Shenzhen Kangtai

Serious questions regarding effectiveness, low transmission rates among babies and the steep risk of side effects make the hepatitis B vaccine’s use very hard to justify for healthy newborns

Full story here

Source Article:
Vietnam Discontinues Hepatitis B Vaccine After Three Babies Die
http://www.collective-evolution.com/2013/08/04/vietnam-discontinues-hepatitis-b-vaccine-after-three-babies-die/

Vietnam has decided to discontinue two Hepatitis B vaccines after three newborn babies died from a routine jab in the Huong Hoa District in the central province of Quang Tri. The provincial department of health made the decision in late July to halt the two vaccine lots all over the country in order to protect other babies from similar consequences.

The nation’s health minister, Nguyen Thi Kim Tien, sent her condolences to the families and has ordered vaccine experts to investigate the tragedy. Health representatives also compensated (although you cannot compensate for a loss of life) the families by paying each one approximately $400 and offering free medical care to the mothers at the hospital where their babies received the deadly vaccinations.

This isn’t the first time in 2013 that vietnam suspended a vaccination. On May 4th, the Ministry of Health suspended the Quinvaxem, a combination vaccine that allegedly protects against diphtheria, tetanus, pertussis, hepatitis B and Haemophilus influenza type b infections. A number of complications arose as a result of this vaccine, including death(0).

Newborn babies are injected with as many as 30+ vaccines before the age of three. This isn’t the first time we’ve seen the Hepatitis B vaccine cause problems. In 2001, a United States court sided with the estate of Tambra Harris who died as a result of an auto-immune disease called systemic lupus erythematosus, (SLE) which resulted from the vaccination(1). Despite all of the information available, the Hepatitis B vaccine has been approved for all U.S. infants at birth. A $475,000 payment was given after her death when the hepatitis vaccine was determined to cause her injury in the form of an SLE. Despite this case, it is not enough to prevent the administration of the vaccine to infants nor is the danger risk disclosed to parents before hand.

The science behind the Hepatitis B vaccine seems to be pretty definitive. It’s also associated with liver disease. Low doses of the hepatitis B vaccine with aluminum adjuvant results in loss of mitochondrial integrity, cell death, and apoptosis, particularly in liver cells.

We conclude that exposure of Hepa1-6 cells to a low dose of adjuvanted hepatitis B vaccine leads to loss of mitochondrial integrity, apoptosis induction, and cell death, apoptosis effect was observed also in C2C12 mouse myoblast cell line after treated with low dose of vaccine. In addition in vivo apoptotic effect of hepatitis B vaccine was observed in mouse liver (2)

The Hepatitis B vaccine is responsible for killing liver cells, this study joins a growing body of evidence demonstrating that liver disease, along with many others are resulting from hepatitis B vaccinations and aluminum adjuvant. Below is the evidence from the study.

In this study, we applied a new technique of gene expression analysis to detect the inflammation and metabolism genes that might be affected by hepatitis B vaccine in mouse liver. Mice were used and divided into three groups: the first and second groups were treated with one or two human doses of vaccine, respectively, and the third group was used as a control. A microarray test showed that expression of 144 genes in the liver was significantly changed after 1 day of vaccination. Seven of these genes, which were related to inflammation and metabolism, were chosen and confirmed by quantitative real-time reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (qRT-PCR) at 1, 4 and 7 days. The expression level of these genes can be considered as a biomarker for the effects of the vaccine (3)

Hepatitis B vaccine, a highly purified, genetically engineered, single antigen vaccine, has generally been accepted as a safe vaccine. In 2000, the Institute of Medicine noted that few vaccines for any disease have been actively monitored for adverse effects over long periods and encouraged evaluation of active long-term monitoring studies of large populations to further evaluate the relative safety of vaccines. The aim of this study was to accept the charge of the 2000 Institute of Medicine Report and extend our own work to determine the frequency of gastrointestinal adverse reactions after hepatitis B vaccination and determine if this frequency was increased over the background rate of gastrointestinal conditions in the U.S. adult population. Our analysis shows that the 40-year-old female population between four to eight days after hepatitis B vaccination was at increased risk for developing gastrointestinal reactions. CONCLUSIONS: Hepatitis B vaccination was statistically associated by chi 2 analysis with gastrointestinal reactions including: hepatitis, gastrointestinal disease and liver function test abnormalities in comparison to our vaccine control groups. The reaction rate observed is outweighed by the benefits of the vaccine. Further analysis is needed to determine the mechanisms by which hepatitis B vaccine is associated with gastrointestinal reactions(4)

This study addressed the problem of external validity found in previous studies of high risk populations by evaluating the benefit of hepatitis B vaccination for the general population of American children. We calculated the risk of liver problems among hepatitis B vaccinated and non-hepatitis B vaccinated children using logistic regression. Hepatitis B vaccinated children had an unadjusted odds ratio of 2.94 and age-adjusted odds ratio of 2.35 for liver problems compared with non-hepatitis B vaccinated children in the 1993 National Health Interview Survey. Hepatitis B vaccinated children had an unadjusted odds ratio of 2.57 and age-adjusted odds ratio of 1.53 for liver problems compared with non-hepatitis B vaccinated children in the 1994 National Health(5)


Aluminum hydroxide injections leads to motor deficits and motor neuron degeneration

Above is a list of study abstracts with links included so further research can be done by those interested. We must critically ask ourselves, what benefit can be gained from giving these vaccinations to newborn babies? They are clearly at a critical time in their development, and administering all of these vaccines could have permanent health consequences. The disease that these babies are being protected from can be transferred only through blood transmission or sexual contact. Babies can only acquire hepatitis B when their mothers are infected, so why not screen mothers to be for hepatitis B?

What’s even more questionable is that the maximum length the vaccine lasts is 20 years(5). Just when a child is entering the age of greatest sexual activity, the vaccination provides no benefit.

If all of these complications can arise from the hepatitis B vaccine, why are they being pushed so hard in the United States? Why are they virtually mandatory? Why aren’t the health hazards of the vaccination addressed?

Sources:

http://www.saigon-gpdaily.com.vn/Health/2013/7/105692/

http://www.thanhniennews.com/index/pages/20130721-vietnam-province-revokes-hepatitis-vaccine-batch-after-3-babies-die.aspx

http://www.saigon-gpdaily.com.vn/Health/2013/7/105702/

http://www.greenmedinfo.com/blog/hepb-vaccine-causes-liver-disease-science-shows-how

(0)http://www.who.int/immunization_standards/vaccine_quality/quinvaxem_pqnote_may2013/en/

(1) http://www.uscfc.uscourts.gov/sites/default/files/CAMPBELL-SMITH.HARRIS032311.pdf

(2) http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22249285

(3) http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21691704

(4) http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12397738

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2819810/?tool=pubmed

(5) http://www.cdc.gov/hepatitis/hbv/hbvfaq.htm#D11

http://vietnambreakingnews.com/2013/07/latest-infant-deaths-force-vietnam-parents-to-rethink-vaccination/#.Uf5Td6Eb6-K

ISRAELI SCIENTISTS SHOW DNA EVIDENCE CAN BE FABRICATED



How easy it is for them to create false flag events and to "engineer a crime scene" -- perhaps pinning the blame for things on the wrong person.

Heads-up America. Who's next?

Source Article:
Israeli Scientists Show DNA Evidence Can be Fabricated
http://www.naturalnews.com/028052_DNA_evidence.html

(NaturalNews) Scientists from the Tel Aviv, Israel-based company Nucleix have demonstrated that it is possible to create fake DNA samples and plant them as evidence at a crime scene, in a paper published in the journal Forensic Science: International Genetics.

"You can just engineer a crime scene," said lead researcher and Nucleix co-founder Dan Frumkin. "Any biology undergraduate could perform this."

In addition to having developed a method of fabricating DNA evidence, Nucleix has also developed a method of detecting faked DNA that it plans to sell to forensics labs.

The scientists have developed two different ways to manufacture DNA samples in order to fool law enforcement. The first involves using DNA profiles from law enforcement databases, which record the code at 13 different spots on a person's genome. Using a pooled library of DNA samples from a number of different people, the geneticists were able to physically construct DNA that was identical to a suspect's DNA at those 13 points. It would take only 425 different DNA snippets to be able to construct every possible permutation, the researchers said.

The second method involved collecting actual DNA from the person whose genetic material was to be faked, such as by collecting a strand of their hair or saliva from a cup they had used.

In both cases, the DNA was then reproduced in large quantities using a technique called whole genome amplification. This DNA was inserted into red blood cells, which were then passed off as a real DNA sample.

A normal blood sample would contain both red and white blood cells, and the red blood cells would contain no DNA. In addition to this difference from a normal sample, amplified DNA lacks certain molecules contained by normal DNA. Forensics labs are unlikely to test for either of these anomalies without cause, however.

"DNA is a lot easier to plant at a crime scene than fingerprints," said Tania Simoncelli of the American Civil Liberties Union, in response to the study. "We're creating a criminal justice system that is increasingly relying on this technology."

The researchers warned that their techniques could also be used to replicate enough of a person's DNA to carry out genetic testing on them without their consent, thus violating their right to genetic privacy.

Wednesday, December 24, 2014

AT LEAST FOUR BABIES CONTRACT HERPES IN 2014 FROM JEWISH BLOOD-SUCKING CIRCUMCISION RITUAL CALLED METZITZAH B'PEH



Source Article:
City reports new case of herpes after metzitzah b’peh
http://www.capitalnewyork.com/article/city-hall/2014/12/8559130/city-reports-new-case-herpes-after-metzitzah-bpeh

The city's health department reported that another infant has been diagnosed with neonatal herpes following the Jewish circumcision ritual known as metzitzah b’peh.

There have now been four reported cases in 2014, and though Mayor Bill de Blasio promised to address the issue on "Day 1" of his term, there have been no policy changes during his first year in office.

Metzitzah b’peh involves a mohel sucking the blood directly from the wounded penis and has been roundly criticized by public health experts and by most authorities in the Jewish community.

While some in the Orthodox community contend this is the only acceptable way to perform a circumcision, or Brit Milah, many authorities condone squeezing the blood out or using sterile pipette to suction the blood, which decreases the chance of infection.

This is the 17th case since 2000, the health department said. Of those 17, two infants have died and at least two more have suffered brain damage.

The most recent case involved a boy born in November. Twelve days after his circumcision, the baby was brought to a pediatrician’s office because of concerns about fussiness after feeding, according to the health department. The boy had a “cluster of papules” on his penis and was sent to a dermatologist who then sent the boy to the emergency room.

The location of the lesions, timing of signs and symptoms, and laboratory identification of HSV-1 are consistent with transmission of the herpes virus during direct contact between the mouth of the ritual circumciser and the newly circumcised infant penis, the health department said.

Circumcision usually occurs on the eighth day of life, a time when an infant's immune system is not fully developed. While many adults can have mild cases of herpes, the virus can be far more dangerous if contracted by a newborn.

Dr. Thomas Farley, the city health commissioner under former mayor Michael Bloomberg, "strongly advised" the practice "never be performed."

In 2013, the Bloomberg administration instituted a rule that required mohels to obtain written consent before performing metzitzah b’peh. The consent form contained the warning that “the New York City Department of Health and Mental Hygiene advises parents that direct oral suction should not be performed.”

The policy, which did nothing to prohibit the practice, enraged many in the Orthodox community who felt their religious freedoms were being violated.

The regulation, according to reports in The Jewish Daily Forward, was rarely enforced, and in August a federal appeals court ruled it must pass a stricter constitutional test than was applied by the lower court.

During a Democratic mayoral primary debate in 2013, de Blasio was asked if he approved of the consent form, and he criticized Bloomberg for not engaging in a dialogue with the “community.”

“I would start over,” de Blasio said. “Change the policy to find a way to protect all the children but also respect religious tradition in an appropriate manner and come in Day 1 to City Hall with a new policy that's fair.”

De Blasio has not changed the policy.

When introducing Dr. Mary Bassett, his choice for health commissioner, de Blasio said he intended to leave the Bloomberg consent policy in place until some better policy could be found.

“I've said we will keep it in place while searching for a solution that is more effective,” de Blasio said at the time. "The current approach can be better and that's what we are going to figure out a way to do—with the community.”

De Blasio has not changed the approach.

His office did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

ISRAELI STUDENT CREATES DISTURBING "JEWELRY" THAT HOOKS INTO YOUR VIENS AND USES HUMAN BLOOD FOR ELECTRICITY AND AS A SOURCE OF "BIOLOGICAL WEALTH"



Can you see where this is going folks? They want to use the "goyim" as a source of energy to feed their sick addiction to an artificial, technological way of life. This really takes the concept of human resources to a whole new level. This woman-like creature is off-the-charts insane and she is a fine example of the type of illness coming out of Israeli culture. How is it possible to create a safe world while entities like this exist? We clearly have a very serious problem on our hands.

Source Article By Sumitra:
Student Creates Bizarre Jewelry That Hooks into Your Veins and Turns Blood Flow into Electricity
http://www.odditycentral.com/art/student-creates-bizarre-jewelry-that-hooks-into-your-veins-and-turns-blood-flow-into-electricity.html

If you think squeezing your feet into an uncomfortable pair of heels is painful, then Israeli jewelry designer Naomi Kizhner’s hardcore jewelry is probably not for you. Her innovative pieces are meant to be inserted into the wearer’s veins, harnessing kinetic power from the body’s involuntary movements to produce electricity.

The collection, named ‘Energy Addicts’, features invasive pieces of gold jewelry that have golden spikes at each end, which are inserted into the wearer’s veins in two places. The continuous flow of blood turns the golden wheel inside the design, eventually creating sufficient kinetic energy to produce electricity that is sufficient to light up an LED and soon maybe even charge mobile devices.



Naomi created the pieces as a part of her graduation project at Jerusalem’s Hadassah College. She explained that she is actually seeking explanations for the nature of a society that is based on biological wealth, and also how we humans can become a natural resource. “In our modern life, energy is everything,” she said. “It is the force that drives economies globally, many times disregarding the consequences.”



“I wanted to explore the post-humanistic approach that sees the human body as a resource,” she added. “It interested me to imagine what the world would be like once it has experienced a steep decline in energy resources and how we will feed our energy addiction. There are lots of developments of renewable energy sources, but the human body is a natural resource for energy that is constantly renewed, as long as we are alive.”



The collection consists of three pieces – the Blood Bridge, the Blinker, and the E-Pulse Conductor. The Blood Bridge is inserted on the veins of the lower arm, while the Blinker fits on the bridge of the nose, harnessing the energy created while blinking. Each time the wearer blinks, there is an increased flow of blood to the area around the eyes and the statement jewelry collects that energy. The E-pulse Connector fits on the upper back, collecting energy from the spinal cord nerves.



Although it isn’t too likely that people will start wearing such jewelry soon, Naomi believes that “technologically we are not too far away from these ideas becoming a reality.” So her intention is to provoke a debate: “will we be willing to sacrifice our bodies in order to produce more energy?”



“I hope that the project will make people think about the possibility that this could be their future, and make them think about whether it is the future they want or whether we can do something different today to avoid it,” she said.

Tuesday, December 23, 2014

THE JEWS WHO CONTROL THE AMERICAN GOVERNMENT



I think it would be good for the American people to take notice of the deterioration of their lives, the increasing loss of their liberty, the perpetual lowering of their standard of living, the illnesses which permeate their and their children's lives, and the extreme toxification of their air, soil, water and food -- and note who is responsible for all of it. It's wakey wakey time. There is a reason the jews have been kicked out of over 100 nations in the last 1800 years. And if Americans do not wake up soon, the jews will have completely sexualized their children, wrecked the economy, stolen the wealth, and attempted to mind-control and enslave those who still sleep. WAKE UP AMERICA!

Source Article:
do jews run the american government
https://realitybloger.wordpress.com/tag/do-jews-run-the-american-government/

Who’s Jew in the Obama Cabinet (past and present)?

An incomplete list…

-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=


Rahm Emanuel - White House Chief of Staff; son of a Zionist terrorist; dual-citizen of Israel and America (Emanuel served in Israel’s military during the First Gulf War instead of the U.S. military)

Joe Biden – A self-proclaimed Zionist, Biden stated about Iran, “Israel can determine for itself—it’s a sovereign nation—what’s in their interest and what they decide to do relative to Iran and anyone else.”

Ron Klain – Chief of Staff to the Vice President

Mona Sutphen – Deputy White House Chief of Staff; 2nd behind Rahm Emanuel

David Axelrod – Special Adviser to the President

Tim Geithner – Treasury Secretary, former President of the New York Fed

Paul Volcker – Chair of Obama’s Economic Recovery Advisory Board (and former Chairman of the Fed)

Lawrence (Larry) Summers (Samuelson) – Director of the White House National Economic Council, Wall Street executive, and World Banker… no conflict of interest here, eh?

Jared Bernstein – Chief Economist and Economic Policy Adviser to the Vice President

Gary Gensler – Chair of the Commodity Futures Trading Commission

Elena Kagan – Solicitor General of the United States, Department of Justice – and Obama’s new Supreme Court Nominee

Sally Katzen – Major legal adviser to Obama-Biden

Eric Lander and Harold E. Varmus – Co-Chairs of the President’s Council of Advisers on Science/Technology

Ellen Moran – White House Director of Communications… which is why we don’t communicate!

Peter Orszag – Director of the Office of Management and Budget

Penny Pritzker – Obama’s National Finance Chair during election, billionare of the Chicago crime boss family, the Pritzkers

Robert Reich – Economic adviser to Obama-Biden

Dennis Ross – Obama’s Ambassador-At-Large in the (entire) Middle East, Obama’s “top envoy” (so a Zionist Jew is in charge of the Arab/Israeli Conflict)

Robert Rubin – Economic adviser to Obama-Biden, former Treasury Secretary, and ultra-greedy Wall Street crook.

Daniel B. Shapiro – Head of the Middle East Desk at the National Security Council (another Jew involved in foreign policy matters involving the Middle East); also a major Washington lobbyist

Mary Schapiro – Chair of the Securities and Exchange Commission, served in every Presidential administration since Reagan, also an executive for Duke Energy and Kraft Foods meaning she regulates Wall Street as a Wall Street executive (what ever happened to conflicts of interest?)

Barney Frank - Chairman, United States House Committee on Financial Services

Phil Schiliro – Assistant to the President for Legislative Affairs, also Henry Waxman’s long-time Chief of Staff

Neal Wolin – Deputy Secretary, U.S. Treasury Department

Lael Brainard – Under Secretary, U.S. Treasury Department

Richard C. Holbrooke - Special Envoy to Pakistan/Afghanistan

Stuart Levey - Under Secretary for Terrorism and Financial Intelligence

Jason Furman - Deputy Director, Office of Management and Budget

Jeffrey Zeints - Chief Performance Officer to streamline government and cut costs as well as Deputy Director for Management at the Office of Management and Budget

Sheila Bair - Chairman, Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation

Karen Mills - Administrator, Small Business Administration

Jon Leibowitz - Chairman, Federal Trade Commission

Douglas H. Shulman - Commissioner, Internal Revenue Service (IRS)

Neil M. Barofsky - Office of the Special Inspector General for the Troubled Asset Relief Program (SIGTARP)

James B. Steinberg - Deputy Secretary of State, second in rank only to Hillary Clinton in foreign policy matters

Jacob Lew - Deputy Secretary of State for Management and Resources, second in rank only to Hillary Clinton in foreign policy matters

Jeffrey D. - Assistant Secretary, Bureau of Near Eastern Affairs (Includes Mideast)

Lee Feinstein - Foreign Policy Advisor

Eric Lynn - Middle East Policy Advisor (again, a Zionist Jew advising on Arab affairs?)

Dennis Ross - Special Advisor for the Gulf (Iran) and Southwest Asia to the Secretary of State

Steven L. Rattner - Director, Presidential Task Force on the Auto Industry

Kenneth R. Feinberg – Special Master for Compensation, U.S. Treasury Department

Mara Rudman - Foreign Policy Advisor

Julius Genachowski - Chair, Federal Communications Commission

Dr. Margaret Hamburg - Commissioner, Food and Drug Administration

Dr. Joshua Sharfstein - Deputy Commissioner, Food and Drug Administration

Susan Sher - Chief of Staff for First Lady Michelle Obama

Dr. Thomas R. Frieden - Director, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention

Neal S. Wolin - Deputy Secretary of the Treasury

Michael S. Barr – Assistant Secretary for Financial Institutions

David S. Cohen - Assistant Secretary for Terrorist Financing

Christina D. Romer (white) – Married to Jewish husband David H. Romer, Chairman, Council of Economic Advisers

Budget and Financial – no wonder these are so screwed up!

Douglas W. Elmendorf - Director, Congressional Budget Office (CBO)

Jon D. Leibowitz – Chairman, Federal Trade Commission (FTC)

Sheila C. Bair – Chairman, Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC)

John E. Bowman – Director, Office of Thrift Supervision (OTS)

Karen G. Mills - Administrator, Small Business Administration (SBA)

Mary L. Schapiro - Chairman, Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC)

Gary G. Gensler - Chairman, Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC)

Daniel J. Roth – President and Chief Executive Officer, National Futures Association (NFA)

Market Manipulators – A small list of the corporateers and regulators who don’t regulate them -

Duncan L. Niederauer - Chief Executive Officer & Director, NYSE Euronext

Robert Greifeld - Chief Executive Officer, NASDAQ OMX Group, Inc.

Lloyd C. Blankfein - Chairman and Chief Executive Officer, Goldman Sachs Group, Inc.

Robert B. Zoellick – President, The World Bank

Stephen Roach -Manageing Director and Economist of Morgan Stanley

Martin Feldstein – Director of American International Group (AIG)

Alan Fishman - CEO of Washington Mutual

George Soros – Major player in all things, Quantum (hedge) Fund

Treasury Department – under (but who control) Secretary Timothy Geithner

Matthew Kabaker – Deputy Assistant Secretary, Counselor to the Secretary

Lewis Alexander – Counselor to the Secretary

Lee Sachs - Counselor to the Secretary

Jake Siewert - Counselor to the Secretary

Gene Sperling – Counselor to the Secretary

Federal Reserve Board of Governors

Ben Shalom Bernanke - Chairman

Donald L. Kohn - Vice Chairman

Kevin M. Warsh – Married to Jewish wife Jane Lauder

Jewish Federal Reserve District Bank Presidents:

Eric S. Rosengren - President, Federal Reserve Bank of Boston

Charles I. Plosser - President, Federal Reserve Bank of Philadelphia

Jeffrey M. Lacker - President, Federal Reserve Bank of Richmond

James B. Bullard - President, Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Gary H. Stern - President, Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis

Thomas M. Hoenig - President, Federal Reserve Bank of Kansas City

Richard W. Fisher - President, Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas

Janet L. Yellen - President, Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco

Obama Czars, illegally appointed officials with power over congress –

Economic Czar – Larry Summers

Regulatory Czar – Cass Sunstein

Pay Czar – Kenneth Feinberg

Guantanomo/Military Czar – Daniel Fried

Car Czar - Steven Rattner

Border Czar - Alan Bersin

Climate Czar - Todd Stern

Global Warming Czar - Carol Browner – Socialist International, that advocates “global governance.” Not Jewish, but very supportive of Zionist and communist/socialist ideals.

…?

And the list goes on and on and on and on…

Monday, December 22, 2014

NATURAL CHILDBIRTH VS. EPIDURAL SIDE EFFECTS AND RISKS



Source Article By Chris Kresser:
Natural childbirth V: epidural side effects and risks
http://chriskresser.com/natural-childbirth-v-epidural-side-effects-and-risks


Before we dive into a discussion of epidural analgesia I’d like to clarify my intention in writing this series in light of some of the comments on previous articles.

The purpose of this series on natural childbirth is to demonstrate that homebirth is as safe – if not safer – than hospital birth for low risk pregnancies, and that medical interventions commonly used in hospital births such as epidurals, induction with synthetic oxytocin and cesarean sections have risks and complications that are often not communicated to pregnant women.

Currently fewer than 1% of births happen at home in the U.S., and I believe this is largely due to misconceptions about its safety. My intention here is to correct those misconceptions.

The purpose of this series is not to condemn the use of these interventions in all circumstances. All of them have their place, and can be very helpful and even life-saving (for mothers and babies) when used appropriately. In fact, I said the following in bold text at the end of the first article in this series:

I want to be clear: no matter where birth takes place, complications may arise that require medical intervention and I am 100% in support of it in these cases.

There is still much we don’t understand about birth, and even more we don’t have direct control over. In some cases, despite a woman’s best efforts to have a natural, undisturbed birth, complications arise that require medical attention (and transfer to a hospital if she started laboring at home). In these circumstances, I absolutely endorse taking advantage of whatever interventions may protect the health and safety of both the mother and baby. At the end of the day, that is far, far more important than the method by which the baby was born.

I also want to be clear that I am not judging women who choose to have hospital births, receive epidurals, induce with Pitocin or end up having a cesarean section. I respect the right of women to choose a method of childbirth that feels safe and comfortable for them.

My purpose, instead, is to tell the side of the story that women are often not told, and to raise awareness of the risks associated with these procedures so that when it comes time to make their own decision, women are adequately educated and informed to do so.
What is an epidural and how common are they?

Dr. Leonard J. Corning, a neurologist in New York, was the first physician to use an epidural. In 1885 he injected cocaine into the back of a patient suffering from spinal weakness and seminal incontinence.

Today, epidurals are by far the most popular method of pain relief during labor in U.S. hospitals. According to the Listening to Mothers II survey (2006), more than 75 percent of women reported that they received an epidural, including 71 percent of women who had a vaginal birth. In Canada in 2005-2006, 54 percent of women who gave birth vaginally used an epidural, and during those same years in England, 22 percent of women overall had an epidural before or during delivery.

In an epidural, a local anesthetic – still derived from cocaine – is injected into the epidural space (the space around the tough coverings that protect the spinal cord). Epidurals block nerve signals from both the sensory and motor nerves, which provides effective pain relief but immobilizes the lower part of the recipient’s body.

In the last decade, a new type of epidural has been developed (called “walking epidurals”) that reduce the motor block and allow some mobility.

Spinal analgesia (a.k.a. “spinals”) are also used for pain relief during labor, but unlike conventional epidurals, they allow women to move during labor. In a spinal, the analgesic drug is injected directly into the spinal space through the dura, producing fast-acting, short-term pain relief.
Epidurals have significant impacts on all hormones of labor

In the last article, Natural Childbirth IV: The Hormones of Birth, we discussed the exquisite orchestration of hormones during birth and the risks of interfering with the body’s natural hormone regulation.

Unfortunately, epidurals interfere with all of the hormones we discussed.

They inhibit beta-endorphin production, which in turn shuts down the shift in consciousness (“going to another planet”) that characterizes undisturbed birth.

Epidurals reduce oxytocin production or keep it from rising during labor. They also blunt the oxytocin peak that would otherwise occur at the time of birth because the stretching receptors of a woman’s lower vagina (which trigger the peak) are numbed.

As Dr. Sarah Buckley explains 1:

A woman laboring with an epidural therefore misses out on the final powerful contractions of labor and must use her own effort, often against gravity, to compensate for this loss. This explains the increased length of the second stage of labor and the increased need for forceps when an epidural is used.

Epidurals have also been shown to inhibit catecholamine (CA) production. Remember that CA can slow or stop labor in the early stages, but it promotes the fetus ejection reflex in the second stage of labor. Thus inhibiting CA production may make delivery more difficult.

Epidurals limit release of prostaglandin F2 alpha, a lipid compound that stimulates uterine contractions and is thought to be involved with the initiation of labor. Prostaglandin F2 alpha levels should naturally rise during an undisturbed labor. However, in one study women with epidurals experienced a decrease in PGF2 alpha and a consequent increase in labor times from 4.7 to 7.8 hours.
Epidurals interfere with labor and have side effects for mothers

Epidurals have been shown to have the following effects on labor and laboring mothers:

They lengthen labor.
They triple the risk of severe perineal tear.
They may increase the risk of cesarean section by 2.5 times.
They triple the occurrence of induction with synthetic oxytocin (Pitocin).
They quadruple the chances a baby will be persistently posterior (POP, face up) in the final stages of labor, which in turn decreases the chances of spontaneous vaginal birth (see below).
They decrease the chances of spontaneous vaginal delivery. In 6 of 9 studies reviewed in one analysis, less than half of women who received an epidural had a spontaneous vaginal delivery.
They increase the chances of complications from instrumental delivery. When women with an epidural had a forceps delivery, the amount of force used by the clinician was almost double that used when an epidural was not in place. This is significant because instrumental deliveries can increase the short-term risks of bruising, facial injuries, displacement of skull bones and blood clots in the scalp for babies, and of episiotomy and tears to the vagina and perineum in mothers.
They increase the risk of pelvic floor problems (urinary, anal and sexual disorders) in mothers after birth, which rarely resolve spontaneously.

One important thing to note about these studies: in most of them, the women in the “control” groups were given opiate painkillers, which are also known to disrupt the natural hormonal processes of birth. We can assume, then, that a comparison of women using no drugs during labor would have revealed even more substantial differences.
Epidural also have side effects for babies

It’s important to understand that drugs administered by epidural enter the baby’s bloodstream at equal and sometimes even higher levels than those present in the mother’s bloodstream.

However, because babies’ immune systems are immature, it takes longer for them to eliminate epidural drugs. For example, the half-life of bupivacaine, a commonly used epidural analgesic, is 2.7 hours in an adult but close to 8 hours in a newborn. 2

Studies have found detectable amounts of bupivacain metabolites in the urine of exposed newborns for 36 hours following spinal anesthesia for cesarians.

Some studies have found deficits in newborn abilities that are consistent with the known toxicity of drugs used in epidurals.

Other studies have found that local anesthetics used in epidurals may adversely effect the newborn immune system, possibly by activating the stress response.

There is evidence that epidurals can compromise fetal blood and oxygen supply, probably via the decrease in maternal blood pressure that epidurals are known to cause.

Epidurals have been shown to cause fetal bradycardia, a decrease in the fetal heart rate (FHR). This is probably secondary to the decrease in maternal CA caused by epidurals which in turn leads to low blood pressure and uterine hyper-stimulation.

Epidurals can cause maternal fever, which in turn may affect the baby. In a large study of first-time moms, babies born to mothers with fever (97% of whom had epidurals) were more likely to be in poor condition (low APGAR scores) at birth, to have poor tone, to require resuscitation and to have seizures in the newborn period, compared to babies born to mothers without fever.

Older studies using the more exacting Brazelton Neonatal Behavioral Assessment Scale (NBAS, devised by pediatricians) rather than the newer, highly criticized Neurologic and Adaptive Capacity Score (NACS, devised by anesthesiologists – can you say “conflict of interest”?) found significant neurobehavioral effects in babies exposed to epidurals.

In one such study, researchers found less alertness and ability to orient, and less mature motor abilities, for the first month of life. These findings were in proportion to the dose of bupivacaine administered, suggesting a dose-related response.
Epidurals may interfere with mother-baby bonding and breastfeeding

Some studies suggest that epidurals may interfere with the normal bonding that occurs between mothers and babies just after birth.

In one study, mothers given epidurals spent less time with their babies in the hospital. The higher doses of drugs they received, the less time they spent.

In another study, mothers who had epidurals described their babies as more difficult to care for one month later than mothers who hadn’t had an epidural.

It’s important to note that neither of these studies prove that epidurals were the cause of the behavioral changes observed. However, if epidurals were at fault, the effects are most likely caused by their interference with the natural orchestration of hormones we discussed in the previous post, and may also be influenced by drug toxicity and the complications associated with epidural births: long labors, forceps and cesareans.

There is also evidence that epidurals may decrease breastfeeding efficiency.

In one study, researchers used the Infant Breastfeeding Assessment Tool (IBFAT) and found scores highest amongst unmedicated babies, lower for babies exposed to epidurals and IV opiates, and lowest for babies exposed to both.

A large prospective study found that women who had used epidurals were more than 2 times as likely to have stopped breastfeeding by 24 weeks compared with women who used non-pharmacological pain relief.
Conclusion

Epidural analgesia is a highly effective form of pain relief and a useful intervention in certain circumstances.

However, epidurals and spinals also cause unintended side effects in both the mother and baby, and interfere with the natural birth process and bonding between mother & baby.

In some cases epidurals may be beneficial, but the evidence suggests that they should not be used as routinely as they currently are in the U.S. and other industrialized countries.

Sunday, December 21, 2014

RETIRED VACCINE RESEARCHER SAYS "IF I HAD A CHILD NOW, THE LAST THING I WOULD ALLOW IS VACCINATION"



Source Article:
Retired Vaccine Researcher to Jon Rappoport: "If I had a child now, the last thing I would allow is vaccination."
http://educate-yourself.org/cn/rappoportinterviewvaccineresearcherjan2002.shtml

[Editor's Note: This interview was posted by Jon Rappoport in early January 2002. You will discover by reading it that the very issues we now face of FORCED vaccination of a laboratory-created vaccine to "protect" us against a laboratory-created "disease" (Swine Flu, Bird flu, etc.) was set into motion a long time ago. The vaccine researcher quoted here flat out says that the World Homicide Organization, WHO, is driven by a DEPOPULATION agenda, and that many African leaders know full well that the explosive spread of HIV and AIDS in Africa was caused by WHO-sponsored vaccinations of the 1970s. This former pharmaceutical insider also debunks the widespread ASSUMPTIONS of vaccine "safety" promoted by orthodox medicine, the CDC, the National Institute of Health, state health departments, and their compliant media propagandists who are all parroting SUPERSTITIONS, rather than FACTS. ..Ken Adachi]

From Jon Rappoport (www.nomorefakenews.com)
http://educate-yourself.org/cn/rappoportinterviewvaccineresearcherjan2002.shtml
January 2002

Retired Vaccine Researcher to Jon Rappoport: "If I had a child now, the last thing I would allow is vaccination." (Aug. 6, 2009)

Jon Rappoport (Q) Interviews a Retired Vaccine Researcher (A) (given the pseudonym of "Dr. Mark Randall")

Q: You were once certain that vaccines were the hallmark of good medicine.

A: Yes I was. I helped develop a few vaccines. I won't say which ones.

Q: Why not?

A: I want to preserve my privacy.

Q: So you think you could have problems if you came out into the open?

A: I believe I could lose my pension.

Q: On what grounds?

A: The grounds don't matter. These people have ways of causing you problems, when you were once part of the Club. I know one or two people who were put under surveillance, who were harassed.

Q: Harassed by whom?

A: The FBI.

Q: Really?

A: Sure. The FBI used other pretexts. And the IRS can come calling too.

Q: So much for free speech.

A: I was "part of the inner circle." If now I began to name names and make specific accusations against researchers, I could be in a world of trouble.

Q: What is at the bottom of these efforts at harassment?

A: Vaccines are the last defense of modern medicine. Vaccines are the ultimate justification for the overall "brilliance" of modern medicine.

Q: Do you believe that people should be allowed to choose whether they should get vaccines?

A: On a political level, yes. On a scientific level, people need information, so that they can choose well. It's one thing to say choice is good. But if the atmosphere is full of lies, how can you choose? Also, if the FDA were run by honorable people, these vaccines would not be granted licenses. They would be investigated to within an inch of their lives.

Q: There are medical historians who state that the overall decline of illnesses was not due to vaccines.

A: I know. For a long time, I ignored their work.

Q: Why?

A: Because I was afraid of what I would find out. I was in the business of developing vaccines. My livelihood depended on continuing that work.

Q: And then?

A: I did my own investigation.

Q: What conclusions did you come to?

A: The decline of disease is due to improved living conditions.

Q: What conditions?

A: Cleaner water. Advanced sewage systems. Nutrition. Fresher food. A decrease in poverty. Germs may be everywhere, but when you are healthy, you don't contract the diseases as easily.

Q: What did you feel when you completed your own investigation?

A: Despair. I realized I was working a sector based on a collection of lies.

Q: Are some vaccines more dangerous than others?

A: Yes. The DPT shot, for example. The MMR. But some lots of a vaccine are more dangerous than other lots of the same vaccine. As far as I'm concerned, all vaccines are dangerous.

Q: Why?

A: Several reasons. They involve the human immune system in a process that tends to compromise immunity. They can actually cause the disease they are supposed to prevent. They can cause other diseases than the ones they are supposed to prevent.

Q: Why are we quoted statistics which seem to prove that vaccines have been tremendously successful at wiping out diseases?

A: Why? To give the illusion that these vaccines are useful. If a vaccine suppresses visible symptoms of a disease like measles, everyone assumes that the vaccine is a success. But, under the surface, the vaccine can harm the immune system itself. And if it causes other diseases -- say, meningitis -- that fact is masked, because no one believes that the vaccine can do that. The connection is overlooked.

Q: It is said that the smallpox vaccine wiped out smallpox in England.

A: Yes. But when you study the available statistics, you get another picture.

Q: Which is?

A: There were cities in England where people who were not vaccinated did not get smallpox. There were places where people who were vaccinated experienced smallpox epidemics. And smallpox was already on the decline before the vaccine was introduced.

Q: So you're saying that we have been treated to a false history.

A: Yes. That's exactly what I'm saying. This is a history that has been cooked up to convince people that vaccines are invariably safe and effective.

Q: Now, you worked in labs. Where purity was an issue.

A: The public believes that these labs, these manufacturing facilities are the cleanest places in the world. That is not true. Contamination occurs all the time. You get all sorts of debris introduced into vaccines.

Q: For example, the SV40 monkey virus slips into the polio vaccine.

A: Well yes, that happened. But that's not what I mean. The SV40 got into the polio vaccine because the vaccine was made by using monkey kidneys. But I'm talking about something else. The actual lab conditions. The mistakes. The careless errors. SV40, which was later found in cancer tumors -- that was what I would call a structural problem. It was an accepted part of the manufacturing process. If you use monkey kidneys, you open the door to germs which you don't know are in those kidneys.

Q: Okay, but let's ignore that distinction between different types of contaminants for a moment. What contaminants did you find in your many years of work with vaccines?

A: All right. I'll give you some of what I came across, and I'll also give you what colleagues of mine found. Here's a partial list. In the Rimavex measles vaccine, we found various chicken viruses. In polio vaccine, we found acanthamoeba, which is a so-called "brain-eating" amoeba.

Simian cytomegalovirus in polio vaccine. Simian foamy virus in the rotavirus vaccine. Bird-cancer viruses in the MMR vaccine. Various micro-organisms in the anthrax vaccine. I've found potentially dangerous enzyme inhibitors in several vaccines. Duck, dog, and rabbit viruses in the rubella vaccine. Avian leucosis virus in the flu vaccine. Pestivirus in the MMR vaccine.

Q: Let me get this straight. These are all contaminants which don't belong in the vaccines.

A: That's right. And if you try to calculate what damage these contaminants can cause, well, we don't really know, because no testing has been done, or very little testing. It's a game of roulette. You take your chances. Also, most people don't know that some polio vaccines, adenovirus vaccines, rubella and hep A and measles vaccines have been made with aborted human fetal tissue. I have found what I believed were bacterial fragments and poliovirus in these vaccines from time to time -- which may have come from that fetal tissue. When you look for contaminants in vaccines, you can come up with material that IS puzzling. You know it shouldn't be there, but you don't know exactly what you've got. I have found what I believed was a very small "fragment" of human hair and also human mucus. I have found what can only be called "foreign protein," which could mean almost anything. It could mean protein from viruses.

Q: Alarm bells are ringing all over the place.

A: How do you think I felt? Remember, this material is going into the bloodstream without passing through some of the ordinary immune defenses.

Q: How were your findings received?

A: Basically, it was, don't worry, this can't be helped. In making vaccines, you use various animals' tissue, and that's where this kind of contamination enters in. Of course, I'm not even mentioning the standard chemicals like formaldehyde, mercury, and aluminum which are purposely put into vaccines.

Q: This information is pretty staggering.

A: Yes. And I'm just mentioning some of the biological contaminants. Who knows how many others there are? Others we don't find because we don't think to look for them. If tissue from, say, a bird is used to make a vaccine, how many possible germs can be in that tissue? We have no idea. We have no idea what they might be, or what effects they could have on humans.

Q: And beyond the purity issue?

A: You are dealing with the basic faulty premise about vaccines. That they intricately stimulate the immune system to create the conditions for immunity from disease. That is the bad premise. It doesn't work that way. A vaccine is supposed to "create" antibodies which, indirectly, offer protection against disease. However, the immune system is much larger and more involved than antibodies and their related "killer cells."

Q: The immune system is?

A: The entire body, really. Plus the mind. It's all immune system, you might say. That is why you can have, in the middle of an epidemic, those individuals who remain healthy.

Q: So the level of general health is important.

A: More than important. Vital.

Q: How are vaccine statistics falsely presented?

A: There are many ways. For example, suppose that 25 people who have received the hepatitis B vaccine come down with hepatitis. Well, hep B is a liver disease. But you can call liver disease many things. You can change the diagnosis. Then, you've concealed the root cause of the problem.

Q: And that happens?

A: All the time. It HAS to happen, if the doctors automatically assume that people who get vaccines DO NOT come down with the diseases they are now supposed to be protected from. And that is exactly what doctors assume. You see, it's circular reasoning. It's a closed system. It admits no fault. No possible fault. If a person who gets a vaccine against hepatitis gets hepatitis, or gets some other disease, the automatic assumption is, this had nothing to do with the disease.

Q: In your years working in the vaccine establishment, how many doctors did you encounter who admitted that vaccines were a problem?

A: None. There were a few who privately questioned what they were doing. But they would never go public, even within their companies.

Q: What was the turning point for you?

A: I had a friend whose baby died after a DPT shot.

Q: Did you investigate?

A: Yes, informally. I found that this baby was completely healthy before the vaccination. There was no reason for his death, except the vaccine. That started my doubts. Of course, I wanted to believe that the baby had gotten a bad shot from a bad lot. But as I looked into this further, I found that was not the case in this instance. I was being drawn into a spiral of doubt that increased over time. I continued to investigate. I found that, contrary to what I thought, vaccines are not tested in a scientific way.

Q: What do you mean?

A: For example, no long-term studies are done on any vaccines. Long-term follow-up is not done in any careful way. Why? Because, again, the assumption is made that vaccines do not cause problems. So why should anyone check? On top of that, a vaccine reaction is defined so that all bad reactions are said to occur very soon after the shot is given. But that does not make sense.

Q: Why doesn't it make sense?

A: Because the vaccine obviously acts in the body for a long period of time after it is given. A reaction can be gradual. Deterioration can be gradual. Neurological problems can develop over time. They do in various conditions, even according to a conventional analysis. So why couldn't that be the case with vaccines? If chemical poisoning can occur gradually, why couldn't that be the case with a vaccine which contains mercury?

Q: And that is what you found?

A: Yes. You are dealing with correlations, most of the time.Correlations are not perfect. But if you get 500 parents whose children have suffered neurological damage during a one-year period after having a vaccine, this should be sufficient to spark off an intense investigation.

Q: Has it been enough?

A: No. Never. This tells you something right away.

Q: Which is?

A: The people doing the investigation are not really interested in looking at the facts. They assume that the vaccines are safe. So, when they do investigate, they invariably come up with exonerations of the vaccines. They say, "This vaccine is safe." But what do they base those judgments on? They base them on definitions and ideas which automatically rule out a condemnation of the vaccine.

Q: There are numerous cases where a vaccine campaign has failed. Where people have come down with the disease against which they were vaccinated.

A: Yes, there are many such instances. And there the evidence is simply ignored. It's discounted. The experts say, if they say anything at all, that this is just an isolated situation, but overall the vaccine has been shown to be safe. But if you add up all the vaccine campaigns where damage and disease have occurred, you realize that these are NOT isolated situations.

Q: Did you ever discuss what we are talking about here with colleagues, when you were still working in the vaccine establishment?

A: Yes I did.

Q: What happened?

A: Several times I was told to keep quiet. It was made clear that I should go back to work and forget my misgivings. On a few occasions, I encountered fear. Colleagues tried to avoid me. They felt they could be labeled with "guilt by association." All in all, though, I behaved myself.I made sure I didn't create problems for myself.

Q: If vaccines actually do harm, why are they given?

A: First of all, there is no "if." They do harm. It becomes a more difficult question to decide whether they do harm in those people who seem to show no harm. Then you are dealing with the kind of research which should be done, but isn't. Researchers should be probing to discover a kind of map, or flow chart, which shows exactly what vaccines do in the body from the moment they enter. This research has not been done. As to why they are given, we could sit here for two days and discuss all the reasons. As you've said many times, at different layers of the system people have their motives. Money, fear of losing a job, the desire to win brownie points, prestige, awards, promotion, misguided idealism, unthinking habit, and so on. But, at the highest levels of the medical cartel, vaccines are a top priority because they cause a weakening of the immune system. I know that may be hard to accept, but it's true. The medical cartel, at the highest level, is not out to help people, it is out to harm them, to weaken them. To kill them. At one point in my career, I had a long conversation with a man who occupied a high government position in an African nation. He told me that he was well aware of this. He told me that WHO is a front for these depopulation interests. There is an underground, shall we say, in Africa, made up of various officials who are earnestly trying to change the lot of the poor. This network of people knows what is going on. They know that vaccines have been used, and are being used, to destroy their countries, to make them ripe for takeover by globalist powers. I have had the opportunity to speak with several of these people from this network.

Q: Is Thabo Mbeki, the president of South Africa, aware of the situation?

A: I would say he is partially aware. Perhaps he is not utterly convinced, but he is on the way to realizing the whole truth. He already knows that HIV is a hoax. He knows that the AIDS drugs are poisons which destroy the immune system. He also knows that if he speaks out, in any way, about the vaccine issue, he will be branded a lunatic. He has enough trouble after his stand on the AIDS issue.

Q: This network you speak of.

A: It has accumulated a huge amount of information about vaccines. The question is, how is a successful strategy going to be mounted? For these people, that is a difficult issue.

Q: And in the industrialized nations?

A: The medical cartel has a stranglehold, but it is diminishing. Mainly because people have the freedom to question medicines. However, if the choice issue [the right to take or reject any medicine] does not gather steam, these coming mandates about vaccines against biowarefare germs are going to win out. This is an important time.

Q: The furor over the hepatits B vaccine seems one good avenue.

A: I think so, yes. To say that babies must have the vaccine-and then in the next breath, admitting that a person gets hep B from sexual contacts and shared needles -- is a ridiculous juxtaposition. Medical authorities try to cover themselves by saying that 20,000 or so children in the US get hep B every year from "unknown causes," and that's why every baby must have the vaccine. I dispute that 20,00 figure and the so-called studies that back it up.

Q: Andrew Wakefield, the British MD who uncovered the link between the MMR vaccine and autism, has just been fired from his job in a London hospital.

A: Yes. Wakefield performed a great service. His correlations between the vaccine and autism are stunning. Perhaps you know that Tony Blair's wife is involved with alternative health. There is the possibility that their child has not been given the MMR. Blair recently side-stepped the question in press interviews, and made it seem that he was simply objecting to invasive questioning of his "personal and family life." In any event, I believe his wife has been muzzled. I think, if given the chance, she would at least say she is sympathetic to all the families who have come forward and stated that their children were severely damaged by the MMR.

Q: British reporters should try to get through to her.

A: They have been trying. But I think she has made a deal with her husband to keep quiet, no matter what. She could do a great deal of good if she breaks her promise. I have been told she is under pressure, and not just from her husband. At the level she occupies, MI6 and British health authorities get into the act. It is thought of as a matter of national security.

Q: Well, it is national security, once you understand the medical cartel.

A: It is global security. The cartel operates in every nation. It zealously guards the sanctity of vaccines. Questioning these vaccines is on the same level as a Vatican bishop questioning the sanctity of the sacrament of the Eucharist in the Catholic Church.

Q: I know that a Hollywood celebrity stating publicly that he will not take a vaccine is committing career suicide.

A: Hollywood is linked very powerfully to the medical cartel. There are several reasons, but one of them is simply that an actor who is famous can draw a huge amount of publicity if he says ANYTHING. In 1992, I was present at your demonstration against the FDA in downtown Los Angeles. One or two actors spoke against the FDA. Since that time, you would be hard pressed to find an actor who has spoken out in any way against the medical cartel.

Q: Within the National Institutes of Health, what is the mood, what is the basic frame of mind?

A: People are competing for research monies. The last thing they think about is challenging the status quo. They are already in an intramural war for that money. They don't need more trouble. This is a very insulated system. It depends on the idea that, by and large, modern medicine is very successful on every frontier. To admit systemic problems in any area is to cast doubt on the whole enterprise. You might therefore think that NIH is the last place one should think about holding demonstrations. But just the reverse is true. If five thousand people showed up there demanding an accounting of the actual benefits of that research system, demanding to know what real health benefits have been conferred on the public from the billions of wasted dollars funneled to that facility, something might start. A spark might go off. You might get, with further demonstrations, all sorts of fall-out. Researchers -- a few -- might start leaking information.

Q: A good idea.

A: People in suits standing as close to the buildings as the police will allow. People in business suits, in jogging suits, mothers and babies. Well-off people. Poor people. All sorts of people.

Q: What about the combined destructive power of a number of vaccines given to babies these days?

A: It is a travesty and a crime. There are no real studies of any depth which have been done on that. Again, the assumption is made that vaccines are safe, and therefore any number of vaccines given together are safe as well. But the truth is, vaccines are not safe. Therefore the potential damage increases when you give many of them in a short time period.

Q: Then we have the fall flu season.

A: Yes. As if only in the autumn do these germs float in to the US from Asia. The public swallows that premise. If it happens in April, it is a bad cold. If it happens in October, it is the flu.

Q: Do you regret having worked all those years in the vaccine field?

A: Yes. But after this interview, I'll regret it a little less. And I work in other ways. I give out information to certain people, when I think they will use it well.

Q: What is one thing you want the public to understand?

A: That the burden of proof in establishing the safety and efficacy of vaccines is on the people who manufacture and license them for public use. Just that. The burden of proof is not on you or me. And for proof you need well-designed long-term studies. You need extensive follow-up. You need to interview mothers and pay attention to what mothers say about their babies and what happens to them after vaccination. You need all these things. The things that are not there.

Q: The things that are not there.

A: Yes.

Q: To avoid any confusion, I'd like you to review, once more, the disease problems that vaccines can cause. Which diseases, how that happens.

A: We are basically talking about two potential harmful outcomes. One, the person gets the disease from the vaccine. He gets the disease which the vaccine is supposed to protect him from. Because, some version of the disease is in the vaccine to begin with. Or two, he doesn't get THAT disease, but at some later time, maybe right away, maybe not, he develops another condition which is caused by the vaccine. That condition could be autism, what's called autism, or it could be some other disease like meningitis. He could become mentally disabled.

Q: Is there any way to compare the relative frequency of these different outcomes?

A: No. Because the follow-up is poor. We can only guess. If you ask, out of a population of a hundred thousand children who get a measles vaccine, how many get the measles, and how many develop other problems from the vaccine, there is a no reliable answer. That is what I'm saying. Vaccines are superstitions. And with superstitions, you don't get facts you can use. You only get stories, most of which are designed to enforce the superstition. But, from many vaccine campaigns, we can piece together a narrative that does reveal some very disturbing things. People have been harmed. The harm is real, and it can be deep and it can mean death. The harm is NOT limited to a few cases, as we have been led to believe.In the US, there are groups of mothers who are testifying about autism and childhood vaccines. They are coming forward and standing up at meetings.They are essentially trying to fill in the gap that has been created by the researchers and doctors who turn their backs on the whole thing.

Q: Let me ask you this. If you took a child in, say, Boston and you raised that child with good nutritious food and he exercised every day and he was loved by his parents, and he didn't get the measles vaccine, what would be his health status compared with the average child in Boston who eats poorly and watches five hours of TV a day and gets the measles vaccine?

A: Of course there are many factors involved, but I would bet on the better health status for the first child. If he gets measles, if he gets it when he is nine, the chances are it will be much lighter than the measles the second child might get. I would bet on the first child every time.

Q: How long did you work with vaccines?

A: A long time. Longer than ten years.

Q: Looking back now, can you recall any good reason to say that vaccines are successful?

A: No, I can't. If I had a child now, the last thing I would allow is vaccination. I would move out of the state if I had to. I would change the family name. I would disappear. With my family. I'm not saying it would come to that. There are ways to sidestep the system with grace, if you know how to act. There are exemptions you can declare, in every state, based on religious and/or philosophic views. But if push came to shove, I would go on the move.

Q: And yet there are children everywhere who do get vaccines and appear to be healthy.

A: The operative word is "appear." What about all the children who can't focus on their studies? What about the children who have tantrums from time to time? What about the children who are not quite in possession of all their mental faculties? I know there are many causes for these things, but vaccines are one cause. I would not take the chance. I see no reason to take the chance. And frankly, I see no reason to allow the government to have the last word. Government medicine is, from my experience, often a contradiction in terms. You get one or the other, but not both.

Q: So we come to the level playing field.

A: Yes. Allow those who want the vaccines to take them. Allow the dissidents to decline to take them. But, as I said earlier, there is no level playing field if the field is strewn with lies. And when babies are involved, you have parents making all the decisions. Those parents need a heavy dose of truth. What about the child I spoke of who died from the DPT shot? What information did his parents act on? I can tell you it was heavily weighted. It was not real information.

Q: Medical PR people, in concert with the press, scare the hell out of parents with dire scenarios about what will happen if their kids don't get shots.

A: They make it seem a crime to refuse the vaccine. They equate it with bad parenting. You fight that with better information. It is always a challenge to buck the authorities. And only you can decide whether to do it. It is every person's responsibility to make up his mind. The medical cartel likes that bet. It is betting that the fear will win.

US SOLDIERS RAPE YOUNG BOYS IN FRONT OF THEIR MOTHERS AND VIDEOTAPE THE RAPES


TEHRAN (FNA)- Now, over a decade later the evidence of these events are beginning to surface, but the Department of Defense is still doing their best to keep it under the radar.

Source Article:
Classified Evidence: US Soldiers Rape Boys in Front of Their Mothers
http://english.farsnews.com/newstext.aspx?nn=13930929001304


To all those who are busy "supporting our troops" -- WAKE THE FUCK UP TO THE EVIL YOU ARE SUPPORTING!! These men and women are not even human. Saying they are worse than animals is an insult to all animals. No animal would ever behave in the way these disgusting excuses for men and women behave. Let them reap what they have sown. They all deserve to be executed.
According to a number of global mainstream media sources, the Pentagon is covering up a disturbing video that was never made public with the rest of the recent torture report.

According to various well respected journalists, including Seymour Hersh, the appalling video was recorded at Abu Ghraib, the notorious US torture dungeon in Iraq that made headlines roughly a decade ago, when the inhumane tactics being used at the prison were exposed.

Sadly, it seems that the evidence released years ago was only scratching the surface.

While the video has remained under wraps thus far, Hersh says it is only a matter of time before it comes out.

Giving a speech at the ACLU last week after the senate torture report was initially released, Hersh gave some insight into what was on the Pentagon’s secret tape.

In the most revealing portion of his speech he said that:

“Debating about it, ummm … Some of the worst things that happened you don’t know about, okay? Videos, um, there are women there. Some of you may have read that they were passing letters out, communications out to their men. This is at Abu Ghraib … The women were passing messages out saying ‘Please come and kill me, because of what’s happened’ and basically what happened is that those women who were arrested with young boys, children in cases that have been recorded. The boys were sodomized with the cameras rolling. And the worst above all of that is the soundtrack of the boys shrieking that your government has. They are in total terror. It’s going to come out.”

“It’s impossible to say to yourself how did we get there? Who are we? Who are these people that sent us there? When I did My Lai I was very troubled like anybody in his right mind would be about what happened. I ended up in something I wrote saying in the end I said that the people who did the killing were as much victims as the people they killed because of the scars they had, I can tell you some of the personal stories by some of the people who were in these units witnessed this. I can also tell you written complaints were made to the highest officers and so we’re dealing with an enormous massive amount of criminal wrongdoing that was covered up at the highest command out there and higher, and we have to get to it and we will. We will. You know there’s enough out there, they can’t (Applause). …. So it’s going to be an interesting election year.”

Put into context with another speech that Hersh gave earlier this year, it becomes clear that the women who witnessed these young boys being raped were actually their mothers.

At a speech in Chicago this past June Hersh was quoted as saying:

“You haven’t begun to see evil… horrible things done to children of women prisoners, as the cameras run.”

Other stories at the London Guardian also talked of young Iraqi detainees getting violently raped by US soldiers.

Ten years ago when the initial Abu Ghraib scandal was in the news, the Guardian published the testimony of an Abu Ghraib detainee who allegedly witnessed one of these brutal attacks.

Former detainee Kasim Hilas said in their testimony that:

“I saw [name blacked out] fucking a kid, his age would be about 15-18 years. The kid was hurting very bad and they covered all the doors with sheets. Then when I heard the screaming I climbed the door because on top it wasn’t covered and I saw [blacked out], who was wearing the military uniform putting his dick in the little kid’s ass, I couldn’t see the face of the kid because his face wasn’t in front of the door. And the female soldier was taking pictures.”

Now, over a decade later the evidence of these events are beginning to surface, but the Department of Defense is still doing their best to keep it under the radar. That is why now more than ever, it is important to keep the pressure on and force the release of this evidence, while the torture report is fresh in the minds of the general population.

Wednesday, December 17, 2014

VACCINES, SCIENTIFIC FRAUD, AND THE AUTISM COVER-UP AT THE CDC



Source Article:
Scientific Fraud and Vaccines
http://www.thinktwice.com/fraud.htm

Here is a recent letter written by Congressman Dave Weldon, MD, to Julie Gerberding, Director of the CDC, regarding a fraudulent CDC-sponsored study purporting to show no link between mercury-laced vaccines and autism:

Dave Weldon, M.D.
15th District, Florida
Congress of the United States
House of Representatives
Washington DC 20515

October 31, 2003

Julie L. Gerberding, M.D., M.P.H.
Director, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
1600 Clifton Road, N.E.
Atlanta, GA 30333

Dear Dr. Gerberding:

I am writing to follow up on our conversation about the article (Verstraeten et. al.,) that will be published in the November 2003 issue of Pediatrics. I have reviewed the article and have serious reservations about the four-year evolution and conclusions of this study.

Much of what I observed transpired prior to your appointment a year ago as the Director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). I am very concerned about activities that have taken place in the National Immunization Program (NIP) in the development of this study, and I believe the issues raised need your personal attention.

I am a strong supporter of childhood vaccinations and know that they have saved us from considerable death and suffering. A key part of our vaccination program is to ensure that we do everything possible to ensure that these vaccines, which are mandatory, are as safe as possible. We must fully disclose adverse events. Anything less than this undermines public confidence.

I have read the upcoming Pediatrics study and several earlier versions of this study dating back to February 2000. I have read various e-mails from Dr. Verstraeten and coauthors. I have reviewed the transcripts of a discussion at Simpsonwood, GA between the author, various CDC employees, and vaccine industry representatives. I found a disturbing pattern which merits a thorough, open, timely, and independent review by researchers outside of the CDC, HHS, the vaccine industry, and others with a conflict of interest in vaccine related issues (including many in University settings who may have conflicts).

A review of these documents leaves me very concerned that rather than seeking to understand whether or not some children were exposed to harmful levels of mercury in childhood vaccines in the 1990s, there may have been a selective use of the data to make the associations in the earliest study disappear. While most childhood vaccines now only have trace amounts of mercury from thimerosal containing vaccines (TCVs), it is critical that we know with certainty if children were injured in the 1990s.

Furthermore, the lead author of the article, Dr. Thomas Verstraeten, worked for the CDC until he left over two years ago to work in Belgium for GlaxoSmithKline (GSK), a vaccine manufacturer facing liability over TCVs. In violation of their own standards of conduct, Pediatrics failed to disclose that Dr. Verstraeten is employed by GSK and incorrectly identifies him as an employee of the CDC. This revelation undermines this study further.

The first version of the study, produced in February 2000, found a significant association between exposure to thimerosal containing vaccines (TCVs) and autism and neurological developmental delays (NDDs). When comparing children exposed to 62.5 ug of mercury by 3 months of age to those exposed to less than 37.5 ug, the study found a relative risk for autism of 2.48 for those with a higher exposure level. (While not significant in the 95% confidence interval for autism, this meets the legal standard of proof exceeding 2.0.) For NDDs the study found a relative risk of 1.59 and a definite upward trend as exposure levels increased.

A June 2000 version of the study applied various data manipulations to reduce the autism association to 1.69 and the authors went outside of the VSD database to secure data from a Massachusetts HMO (Harvard Pilgrim, HP) in order to counter the association found between TCVs and speech delay. At the time that HP's data was brought in, HP was in receivership by the state of Mass., its computer records had been in shambles for years, it had multiple computer systems that could not communicate with one another (Journal of Law, Ethics and Medicine Sept. 22, 2000), and it used a health care coding system totally different from the one used across the VSD. There are questions relating to a significant underreporting of Autism in Mass. The HP dataset is only about 15% of the HMO dataset used in the February 2000 study. There may also be significant problems with the statistical power of the HP dataset.

In June of 2000 a meeting was held in Simpsonwood, GA, involving the authors of the study, representatives of the CDC, and the vaccine industry. I have reviewed a transcript of this meeting that was obtained through the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA). Comments from Simpsonwood, NJ meeting include: (summary form, not direct quotes):

* We found a statistically significant relationship between exposures and outcomes. There is certainly an under ascertainment of adverse outcomes because some children are just simply not old enough to be diagnosed, the current incidence rates are much lower than we would expect to see (Verstraeten);

* We could exclude the lowest exposure children from our database. Also suggested was removing the children that got the highest exposure levels since they represented an unusually high percentage of the outcomes. (Rhodes)

* The significant association with language delay is quite large. (Verstraeten);

* This information should be kept confidential and considered embargoed;

* We can push and pull this data anyway we want to get the results we want;

* We can alter the exclusion criteria any way we want, give reasonable justifications for doing so, and get any result we want;

* There was really no need to do this study. We could have predicted the outcomes;

* I will not give TCVs to my grandson until I find out what is going on here.

Another version of the study - after further manipulation - finds no association between TCVs and autism, and no consistency across HMOs between TCVs and NDDs and speech delay.

The final version of the study concludes that "No consistent significant associations were found between TCVs and neurodevelopmental outcomes," and that the lack of consistency argues against an association. In reviewing the study there are data points where children with higher exposures to the neuortoxin mercury had fewer developmental disorders. This demonstrates to me how excessive manipulation of data can lead to absurd results. Such a conclusion is not unexpected from an author with a serious, though undisclosed, conflict of interest.

This study increases speculation of an association between TCVs and neurodevelopmental outcomes. I cannot say it was the author's intent to eliminate the earlier findings of an association. Nonetheless, the elimination of this association is exactly what happened and the manner in which this was achieved raises speculation. The dialogue at the Simpsonwood meeting clearly indicates how easily the authors could manipulate the data and have reasonable sounding justifications for many of their decisions.

The only way these issues are going to be resolved - and I have only mentioned a few of them - is by making this particular dataset and the entire VSD database open for independent analysis. One such independent researcher, Dr. Mark Geier, has already been approved by the CDC and the various IRBs to access this dataset. They have requested the CDC allow them to access this dataset and your staff indicated to my office that they would make this particular dataset available after the Pediatrics study is published.

Earlier this month the CDC had prepared three similar datasets for this researcher to review to allow him to reanalyze CDC study datasets. However when they accessed the datasets - which the researchers paid the CDC to assemble - the datasets were found to have no usable data in them. I request that you personally intervene with those in the CDC who are assembling this dataset to ensure that they provide the complete dataset, in a usable format, to these researchers within two weeks. The treatment that these well-published researchers have received from the CDC thus far has been abysmal and embarrassing. I would also be curious to know whether Dr. Verstraeten, an outside researcher for more than two years now, was required to go through the same process as Dr. Geier in order to continue accessing the VSD.

You have not been a part of creating this current situation, but you do have an opportunity to help resolve this issue and ensure that confidence and trustworthiness in the CDC and our national vaccination program is fully restored. I would ask that you work with me to ensure that a full, fair, and independent review is made of the VSD database to fully examine this matter. I would like to meet with you at your earliest convenience to move this process forward.

Thank you for your consideration. I look forward to working with you on this urgent matter of great importance to our nation's most precious resource, our children.

Sincerely,
Dave Weldon, M.D.
Member of Congress


Here is some correspondence Thinktwice! recently received from a research analyst who spent 7 years working for the CDC to assess the benefit/risk ratio of the chickenpox vaccine. This analyst quit in disgust when he found that his data proving serious problems with this vaccine was suppressed.

Q. Dear Editor, I have read with great interest various items on your website. First of all, please let me introduce myself. I have served as Research Analyst on the Antelope Valley Varicella Active Surveillance Project, one of three sites supported by a grant from the CDC, for the past 7 years. I recently resigned from this position as I encountered deleterious effects of the varicella vaccine (including increasing incidence of Herpes Zoster among children with prior wild-type varicella experience) which appeared to be suppressed by my supervisors and the CDC; while all positive results were published.

I have three manuscripts that have much technical merit, however, like other manuscripts that support increased incidence of HZ among adults by Brisson et al and Thomas et al, the major U.S. journals (such as Journal of the American Medical Association and New England Journal of Medicine) will not consider them for publication. Do you have any recommendations on other journals, even European ones that might be more objective?

Is there an appropriate manner in which to have the manuscripts objectively peer-reviewed and published in a peer reviewed journal. Dr. Philip R. Krause, head research scientist of the Biologics Lab of the FDA, had done a preliminary review of one of my manuscripts and suggested there was indeed some merit to the hypotheses presented.

I have also, unbelievably found great manipulation of data by CDC suggesting "no increases in herpes zoster at this time." Yet, they utilized a study that had insufficient power and too small of a sample size to detect increases in incidence less than 400%.

Thank you in advance for any assistance you can provide.

A. Dear ----, As you must know by now, it will be very difficult to have your papers accepted in mainstream medical journals. We would be interested in publishing your research online.

Q. Dear Editor, I have completed three manuscripts which were submitted to major U.S. journals and which were rejected. The reasons for rejection were just amazing. For example, I was told I needed additional years of data to show a trend. Interestingly, Dr. Hope Simpson's manuscript was published, including his figure on herpes zoster incidence based on 6 cases of herpes zoster encountered during 16 years in a town of 510 children in Cirencester, England. My study had 15 times greater the observation time of this study and was on par with most other studies of herpes zoster incidence.

Recognizing that the U.S. journals might not publish, I have currently submitted them to another prestigious peer-reviewed journal and the manuscripts are being reviewed at this time. I have just completed a 4th manuscript, Why herpes-zoster incidence among school age children is paradoxically high despite seven years of universal vaccination: Preliminary Data and Hypotheses. Should I receive a negative response regarding publication in the journals I would consider online publication that you kindly mention. Why did you seem so certain that major U.S. journals were not going to publish the paper?

[Furthermore,] I have worked at one of the three varicella active surveillance sites in the nation for the past 7 years. While all my positive results were published, the negative results appeared to be suppressed -- thus, due to ethical concerns I resigned as Research Analyst. I have specific, quantified details concerning, for example, the VAERS reporting [the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System jointly operated by the FDA and CDC] and how the published data of herpes zoster indicates 2.6 cases per 100,000 doses. The actual figure that was measured during active surveillance for herpes zoster during a two year period in a community of 320,000 residents was approximately 44 per 100,000 doses, thus, the VAERS rate represented only a little more than 5% of the true value.

I could provide many other details to you and am pursuing publication of 4 manuscripts in peer-reviewed journals.

There is something with which you can help me. I recently wrote a manuscript entitled, Why herpes-zoster incidence among school age children is paradoxically high despite seven years of universal vaccination: Preliminary Data and Hypotheses. Would you have any experiences of school nurses and or other healthcare professionals who have actually noted and increase in the number of herpes-zoster (shingles) cases in recent years relative to the prelicensure era? Will be back in touch with you soon. I will check out the reference you have provided.

A. Dear ----, If you'd like, I'll send you a complimentary copy of our booklet on chickenpox. It includes a few case histories and other pertinent information on chickenpox and its vaccine. Tell me where to send it.

Major journals generally support vaccination programs. Therefore, they often reject papers that show vaccines in a poor light.

Q. You are so very right about publishers accepting research with a positive bias. All I was attempting to do is be very objective -- presenting both the postive aspects of vaccination (which were all published) along with the negative aspects (which were suppressed for one to two years). I am an objective researcher, neither for or against vaccination. I only report numbers and analyze data. I do this very well and attempt to make a balanced presentation based on solid facts with appropriate confidence intervals!

Thank you very much for sending the case histories concerning chickenpox and shingles (herpes zoster). I will keep you informed of additional details -- especially if my manuscripts are published.


Here is some correspondence Thinktwice! received from a high level employee working for the State Health Department. He read a secret CDC bulletin acknowledging that flu shots from 1993 to 1996 were "dirty." When he tried to get a copy of this Bulletin, his efforts were met with great resistance.

Q. My family has been in crisis mode for the better part of 5 1/2 years. My wife has been diagnosed as the worse Myasthenia Gravis patient in New Mexico -- besides one other man who tried to treat himself by overdosing on steroids after getting his diagnosis. [We believe the flu vaccine caused her condition.] Our situation is particularly complex, as my wife has been the state medical director for Children's Medical Services for over 17 years, and continues to try and hold onto her job by working at home a few hours a week. I work in the Office of Epidemiology for the state, and have a rather high level technology position. So you see, both of our jobs could be jeopardized immediately by political forces if confidentiality was breached. I was privy to a bulletin put out by the CDC around 1998, or 1999, stating that they had acknowledged that the flu shots from 1993 to 1996 were considered 'dirty'. When I went back to get a copy of this bulletin last year (so that my wife could take an early retirement), no one admitted to the existence of such document. Believe me, I have contacts all over the country, including Atlanta. I realize now that the ranking members of CSTE are privy to information that not even EIS Officers in Atlanta know about. We are looking for ways to get a copy of that bulletin, or any related documents, just so that my wife can retire...not for any other purpose. I look forward to hearing from you, and would like to get whatever information you can provide. Thanks.

A. Thanks for the brief explanation of your situation. Apparently you believe that your wife's condition resulted from a flu vaccine. I would be interested in hearing more of the details. I would also like to see that bulletin. If others in your field suspect that you and your wife blame vaccines for her condition, they will remain cautious around you and will not provide you with information. We publish a small booklet documenting hazards of the flu vaccine. I can send you a copy if you'd like. Please email me with a mailing address. Best wishes.