The Liberty Beacon

The Liberty Beacon

What's Hot…


Only one can be right 1


TLB Preface by: Roger Landry (TLB)

When a serious Ph.D. scientist (Dr. Boyd Haley) is exposed to the propaganda and voodoo science of a Big Pharma Vaccine agent MD (Dr. Paul Offit) this is the result.

As you will see there is no love loss coming from Dr. Haley … and not much in the way of earned respect for Dr. Offit either. Their stance on Vaccines could not be more polarized. What you will see and hear is the propaganda as set forth by Big Pharma, vs the reality described by a life long dedicated researcher.

One propagates the idea that vaccines are a modern miracle of medicine having saved countless lives, and the other expounds on the idea that vaccines are responsible for the disabling of an entire generation of our children! These two stances could not differ more …

Only one can be correct … you be the judge!

If Vaccines concern you … watching this video may be among the most valuable 36 minutes you will invest in this subject! After you watch this video please continue on to the vital presentation below …

Bio-chemist Dr. Boyd Haley disputes the claims of vaccine proponent Dr. Paul Offit point by point in this pilot video.

Haley vs Offit: A Virtual Debate re The Greatest Medical Controversy of our Time


Help us complete this step or our FULL Documentary! You can be a part of ensuring that this groundbreaking video on vaccine safety is completed. Featuring a virtual debate between Boyd Haley and Paul Offit, the documentary offers important insights on what can happen when industry profits, rather than human health, drive government vaccine recommendations.

Dr. Offit appears often on national television as an expert on vaccination. By not inviting any of his many critics, the mainstream media gives the impression that he has none. This false impression leaves the public uninformed on the very real threats posed to children’s health through an overly aggressive vaccine program that now recommends children receive an astounding 48 vaccines by the age of six.

Your donation will allow us to complete this step of the project by filming Boyd Haley with a professional crew as we have done with Paul Offit . In return, you’ll receive:

• A complete bibliography of 145 published scientific studies proving the danger of mercury in vaccines.

• Dr. Offit’s full interview transcript with color-coded comments from six of his critics with disease mortality charts and links to more information.

(please go HERE for more information)

The six critics are:

• Boyd Haley, PhD • Brian Hooker, PhD • Russell Blaylock, MD • Suzanne Humphries, MD • Sherri Tenpenny, MD and • David Ayoub, MD

About Richard P. Milner

Richard P. Milner is an award-winning documentary filmmaker with over thirty years’ experience in film and television.  Milner is the co-founder and executive director of Public Affairs Media, Inc.

Recent television projects Milner has produced and/or directed include ABC Network News Good Morning AmericaThis week with George Stephanopoulos, and World News Tonight with Peter Jennings.

Staff series work has included Crazy for Food (PBS); Navajo Rodeo Cowboys(PBS); Geography in U.S. History (PBS); A Personal Story (TLC); and Science Times (New York Times TV and National Geographic).  Milner also originated and co-produced the PBS Frontline documentary on endocrine disrupting chemicals entitled, Fooling with Nature.

At NBC-TV, New York, Milner developed story ideas, edited and directed post-production on more than twenty documentary specials for NBC White Paper, NBC Reports and NBC Magazine on health, economics, science, and public affairs with such correspondents as David Brinkley, Marvin Kalb, John Dancy, Lloyd Dobbins, and Edwin Newman.

Milner’s documentaries have won the Christopher Award and the WorldFest Houston Gold Award for Best Continuing News Story.


TLB: Please click on this link to INDIEGOGO to help make this happen. This is one of the most serious issues facing all of us with catastrophic implications for our children and future generations. Knowledge is the only tool to effectively overcome planned ignorance … be a part of the solution … PLEASE …


By TLB Contributor: Christina England

I recently attended the annual Allergy & Free from Show in London. The show is the largest show of its kind in the UK, with over three hundred exhibitors, displaying everything from wheat-free biscuits to allergen-free mattresses.

There were a vast number of exhibitors, exhibiting an array of produce for wheat-free, gluten-free, egg-free, dairy-free, soya-free and nut-free diets, and after attending a number of lectures on food allergies, I began to question what was behind the rapidly growing problem of severe food allergies.

The exhibitors informed me that the number of people who suffer from food allergies has grown to an all-time high, with at least one in five people in Britain suffering from a food allergy or food intolerance. Interested in their comments, I asked them what they believed was causing this massive increase. Although many were reluctant to answer my questions, a few people told me that they believed that environmental factors were at the root of the problem.

Intrigued, I asked them whether or not they believed the large number of childhood vaccinations could be to blame for the increase. Although a few did believe that this was a possibility, none of them wanted to be interviewed on the topic.

The Difference Between a Food Allergy and a Food Intolerance

A food allergy usually happens rapidly, within a few minutes of eating a particular food substance. The reaction is often very severe and in some cases can cause the sufferer to die. [1]

Food intolerance is very different. A person is classified as having food intolerance if they are hypersensitive to a particular food substance. The onset of the symptoms is a lot slower and less severe than those of an allergy and the sufferer can usually tolerate a reasonable amount of the offending food before the reaction occurs. [2]

Professionals Unafraid to Speak Out About Vaccinations

Unlike the exhibitors, there are some professionals who are unafraid of voicing their opinions on vaccinations and food allergies.

Community contributor Barbara Feick Gregory is a woman who is unafraid of speaking out. To ascertain whether or not vaccinations were responsible for the massive increase in food allergies, she decided to compile a major study of Internet resources, patents, medical studies, allergy sites, allergy discussions, vaccination information sites (both pro and con), animal studies, veterinary websites, vaccine package inserts, etc., and explain what correlations she had discovered.

When she began researching the subject of peanut allergies, she discovered that in 1960, when children were receiving as few as two vaccinations peanut allergies were extremely rare. However, by 1997, the number of young children suffering from peanut allergies in the US had risen to 1 in 250. By 2002, this number had doubled to 1 in 125.

Shocked by what she had discovered, Ms. Gregory began to study each country in turn. She wrote, “Food allergies have become a major problem in industrialized countries,” and shared the following statistics from countries around the world:

  • Australia: “1 in 20 Australian children suffers from a potentially fatal food allergy…”
  • Canada: “…nearly 6 % of children suffer from food allergies……the Anaphylaxis Canada’s Summer 2001 newsletter states that “approximately 4% of children and 2% of adults have developed a potentially lethal allergy to food.”
  • France: 4 to 8.5% of preschool children have food allergies
  • Greece: 6% -8% of infants and young children have food allergies
  • Italy: “An estimated 6 to 8% of the Italian population has food allergies.
  • Japan: “about 10% of Japan’s population suffers from food allergies
  • Malaysia: “about 30% of young children are likely to develop allergic disorders in the first five years of life
  • Netherlands: about 4.8% of the population has food allergies
  • South Africa: up to 6% of young children have food allergies
  • Sweden: approximately 10% of children have food allergies
  • USA: 6 to 8 percent of children 4 years of age or under have food allergies
  • UK: 5-7% of infants have food allergies.”(sic)

Ms. Gregory discovered that the countries which had the lower numbers of vaccinations had fewer food allergies than the countries with higher numbers of vaccinations.

After completing her study, she came to the following conclusions:

“Vaccines are the main cause of food allergies. The first allergy in children is casein (milk) allergy due to the casein and aluminum adjuvant in the DTaP – Diphtheria, tetanus and pertussis (whooping cough) shot which is often given at 2-3 months of age. Since all babies are fed milk in some form immediately, this is the first allergy to be recognized. 

The next allergy to usually show up at about 3 months of age is soy allergy due to the soy peptone broth and aluminum adjuvant in the Pneumococcal Conjugate vaccine given at approximately 2 months of age. Since soy formula is frequently fed to infants, this allergy also shows up early.

Peanut and nut allergies have shown up as early as 6 months of age in children. Peanut oil is a common trade secret ingredient in vaccine adjuvants. Some manufacturers rely more predominantly on other oils in the vaccines – sesame oil in the vaccines used in Israel and parts of Europe or fish oil which is used in the Scandinavian countries.

At 6 months of age, children can have had as many as 16 vaccinations several of which can contain mixed oils in the vaccine adjuvant. Many different food oils can be used in the vaccine adjuvant and even more foods used in the culture medium. These ingredients do not have to appear on the package insert because they are considered “inactive” and are a protected trade secret.

Most physicians do not know that all of the ingredients do not appear on the package insert. Vaccines are not identical from batch to batch or even from dose to dose. The food protein remaining from the oils in the adjuvant or the culture medium varies which is why all the children getting vaccinated from a particular batch of vaccine may not all get the same food allergies.” [3] [4]

Her study is certainly very interesting and extremely well researched, but is she correct?

Dr. Tim O’Shea Mirrors Her Research

Dr. Tim O’Shea has also studied food allergies and vaccination in depth. He, too, discovered that before 1900, peanut allergies were unheard of, whereas today, as many as 1.5 million children in the US are allergic to peanuts.

In an article titled Vaccines and the Peanut Allergy Epidemic, he wrote:

“The big change came with vaccines. Peanut oils were introduced as vaccine excipients in the mid 1960s. An article appeared in the NY Times on 18 Sept, 1964 that would never be printed today. The author described how a newly patented ingredient containing peanut oil was added as an adjuvant to a new flu vaccine, in order to prolong the “immunity.” The oil was reported to act as a time release capsule, and theoretically enhanced the vaccine’s strength. Same mechanism as with penicillin.

That new excipient, though not approved in the US, became the model for subsequent vaccines.” [5]

In other words, peanut oil was never approved as a safe ingredient for vaccinations, but the pharmaceutical industry decided to use it anyway.

What Has Peanut Oil in Vaccination Got to do with Peanut Allergies?

According to Dr. O’Shea, by 1980, peanut oil was considered to be an adjuvant – a substance able to increase reactivity to the vaccine. He wrote:

The pretense here is that the stronger the allergic response to the vaccine, the greater will be the immunity that is conferred. This fundamental error is consistent throughout vaccine literature of the past century.”

He continued:

“Why was peanut allergy so violent? Adjuvant pioneer Maurice Hilleman claimed peanut oil adjuvants had all protein removed by refining. The FDA disagreed. They said some peanut protein traces would always persist - that even the most refined peanut oils still contained some traces of intact peanut proteins. This was the reason doctors were directed to inject vaccines intramuscular rather than intravenous – a greater chance of absorption of intact proteins, less chance of reaction.

But all their secret research obviously wasn’t enough to prevent sensitivity. Mother Nature bats last: no intact proteins in the body. 60 million years of Natural Selection didn’t create the mammalian immune system for nothing. Put intact proteins, peanut or whatever, for any imagined reason into the human system and the inflammatory response will fire. And since the goal of oil emulsion adjuvants was to prolong reactivity in the first place – the notion of time-release – this led to sensitization.” [5]

What he is saying is this – if you vaccinate a child with an intact protein, an inflammatory response will take place. This is because the protein will eventually invade the bloodstream and when it does, the body sees this protein as a threat and therefore sets up a defense mechanism to include antibodies. When an antibody is exposed to a protein, it triggers a release of histamine. The histamine in turn causes an inflammation, which leads to a sensitivity to that protein. This is a naturally occurring chain reaction of events. [6]

The Terms Allergy and Anaphylaxis Were Created to Describe Vaccine Reactions

In fact, according to, the terms allergy and anaphylaxis were created by pediatrician Clemens von Pirque and Dr. Charles Richet to describe adverse reactions to vaccines. explains that during the late 1800s people began to fall ill after receiving the diptheria vaccine. Dr. Clemens von Pirque began to study this illness at detail in a bid to discover what was causing their illness. wrote:

Austrian pediatrician Clemens von Pirquet studied the illness at length and observed that the symptoms of this sickness resembled those in people who were hypersensitive to pollens and bee stings. To better describe this ‘altered reactivity’ to the sera he created the Latin derived word allergy in 1906.”

In 1901, Dr. Charles Richet found similar reactions when he tried to vaccinate dogs against jellyfish stings. He reported that the dogs had a very violent reaction after receiving the second vaccine, killing them within minutes. Dr. Richet decided to name the reaction ana-phylaxis the Latin term for anti-protection. stated:

Richet experimented further. He quickly discovered that any protein including food proteins injected into the bloodstream results in sensitization and anaphylaxis on subsequent exposure to the food. Richet injected minute quantities of milk and meat proteins into cats, rabbits and horses and showed that anaphylaxis is a universal immune system defense.” [7]

Dr. Richet went on to win a Nobel Peace Prize for his work.

For more information on these two doctors and their discoveries related to vaccinations, allergies and anaphylaxis, please read references [8] and [9].


Crucial scientific evidence has proven that vaccinations are responsible for children suffering food allergies for more than a century. Despite this evidence being available, Big Pharma and world governments have chosen to ignore the facts in favor of vaccination. The question is, why? Why has this crucial evidence been hidden for so long, potentially putting the lives of millions of vulnerable children at risk?

This ignorance has caused millions of children worldwide to need the use of EpiPens to overcome severe allergic reactions to food substances. (EpiPens are an emergency device used to inject adrenaline to treat the severe allergic reaction anaphylaxis).

It is my firm belief that this information has been covered up and hidden for all these years for financial gain. After all, it is far more beneficial for Big Pharma to have millions of children using EpiPens than for children to be fit and healthy, and it is a recognized fact that Big Pharma and governments work hand in hand.




ChristinaChristina was born and educated in London, U.K. In 1978, Christina changed her career path to dedicate her time to caring for the elderly and was awarded the title of Care Giver of the Year for her work with the elderly in 1980. For the last decade, Christina England has been investigating the safety and efficacy of vaccines. Her articles have had over 500,000 hits and she is now known worldwide for her groundbreaking journalism work.

Christina also has created a world first online resource for parents who have lost their children after vaccine injuries


TLB recommends you visit Miss Eco Glam for more great/pertinent articles and information

See featured article HERE



It looks the same—the bread, pies, sodas, even corn on the cob. So much of what we eat every day looks just like it did 20 years ago. But something profoundly different has happened without our knowledge or consent. And according to leading doctors, what we don’t know is already hurting us big time.

What are GMOs?

GMO stands for “Genetically Modified Organism”. Sometimes the initials “GM” are used, which stands for “Genetically Modified”.

Genetic engineering is very different from normal breeding because it involves taking genes from a completely different species and inserting them into the DNA of another species of plant or even of an animal.


For the first time in history, bacteria, plants and animals can all be mixed up together. For example, right now the DNA of bacteria is put into food plants.

The two primary reasons why plants are genetically engineered are to allow them to:

  • Drink poison, or
  • Produce poison

The poison drinkers are inserted with genes from bacteria that allow them to survive otherwise deadly doses of herbicides. The main poison is GMOs is glyphosate, the poison that is in Roundup. Biotech companies sell the seed and herbicide as a package deal, and farmers can then use hundreds of millions of pounds more herbicide than would normally be possible without the plants dying.

The poison producers are called Bt crops. Inserted genes from the a bacteria produce a pesticide (poison) in every cell of the plant. What kills insects, kills us. This is a pesticide which is INSIDE the plant. You cannot wash it off!

More than 70% of the foods on supermarket shelves contain GM foods. Get a magnifying glass and read the list of ingredients. Unless the following words are organic, do not eat it.

  • Corn

  • Soy

  • Canola (Rapeseed. This is toxic and should not be eaten in any case)

  • Cotton seed (This is toxic and should not be eaten in any case)

  • Sugar (beet sugar is GMO. Cane sugar so far is okay)

  • Hawaiian papaya

  • Zucchini & crook neck squash

Other countries have or import GMO rice and potato.

But it gets worse. Since we now have genetically modified alfalfa, and alfalfa, corn and soy are fed to animals, unless it’s organic, you must not eat:

  • Dairy

  • Meat

  • Eggs

  • Farm-raised fish or seafood

Glyphosate has even been found in the bodies of dairy cows in Denmark, because Europe imports GMO feed! So you know it has to be in the milk.

This is why we no longer eat out anywhere. Since no restaurant uses organic, gmo-free food, or gives you a full list of ingredients, you are bound to be eating poison in virtually every restaurant, fastfood joint and school canteen.

Organic food is meant to be free of GMOs.  But we are starting to find out that even this is not a guarantee.  It’s way too easy to sneak in.  There have been so far at least two instances discovered where GMOs were found in so-called ‘organic’ food.  In each case, this discovery was not made by organizations that should protect you, like the FDA.  They were made by independent bodies.  Baby food is one.  Which is really scary.  The only food a baby should have is breastmilk and, when ready for solids, homemade baby food (cook it, strain it, freeze in icecube trays) and reverse osmosis water.

Kashi ‘organic’ cereal is another.  The Cornucopia Institute found that Kashi has high levels of GMOs in it’s ‘organic’ cereal.  You may be less surprised at this once you realize that Kashi is not owned by nature-lovers, but by Kellogg’s.

Animals Fed GMO Corn for Two Years Grow MASSIVE TUMORS

In the first long-term study of GMOs, rats fed a lifelong diet of one of genetically modified corn grew tumors and had multiple organ damage, of the liver and kidneys.

Corn is meant to be nutritious. It is not meant to do this -


ANIMALS FED GMOs Have Sterile Grandchildren

When Genetically Modified Organisms (GMOs) were first created, some people knew they were very bad.  But no one really knew just how bad they are.  We know that now.  Basically, not only are they killing people, because they are so highly toxic, they are also doing something VERY DIFFERENT TO NORMAL FOOD, that in the longer term they will wipe out the human race if not eradicated completely.  Because animals fed GMOs do not have great grand children.  NO other toxic food does that!  This is proof that we are dealing with something completely different.  And evil.  Here is some evidence of this:

Concerning the experiment carried out jointly by the National Association for Gene Security and the Institute of Ecological and Evolutional Problems, Dr. Alexei Surov had this to say.

“We selected several groups of hamsters, kept them in pairs in cells and gave them ordinary food as always,” says Alexei Surov.

“We did not add anything for one group but the other was fed with soya that contained no GM components, while the third group with some content of Genetically Modified Organisms and the fourth one with increased amount of GMO.  We monitored their behavior and how they gain weight and when they give birth to their cubs.  Originally, everything went smoothly.  However, we noticed quite a serious effect when we selected new pairs from their cubs and continued to feed them as before.  These pairs’ growth rate was slower and they reached their sexual maturity more slowly.  When we got some of their cubs we formed the new pairs of the third generation.  We failed to get cubs from these pairs, which were fed with GM foodstuffs.  It was proved that these pairs lost their ability to give birth to their cubs,” Dr. Alexei Surov said.

Another surprise was discovered by scientists in hamsters of the third generation. Hair grew in the mouth of the animals that took part in the experiment.

GMOs remain inside of us

The only published human feeding study revealed one of the most dangerous problems from GM foods.  The gene inserted into GM soy transfers into the DNA of bacteria living inside our intestines and continues to function.  This means that long after we stop eating GMOs, we may still have potentially harmful GM proteins produced continuously inside of us.

Put more plainly, eating a corn chip produced from Bt corn might transform our intestinal bacteria into living pesticide factories, possibly for the rest of our lives.

Please, get this information to all your family and friends!

By the way, I muscle tested to find out if there was any product that could undo the damage to the intestinal bacteria that GMOs. I have no way of knowing if this is correct or not, but I got that monolaurin (from coconut) may help. It’s been reported to help to heal Lyme’s disease.

GMOS destroy Organs

If GMOs did nothing, then organs of animals fed GMOs should look exactly the same as normal. But they look radically different, as you can see from this photo:


If you that still does not convince you that it is deadly serious that you become obsessive about getting GMOs out of your diet, here’s another pic that proves that GMOs seriously alter the whole body. This photo is a comparison of rat testicles:


People are dying at very early ages, and you know from seeing these pictures of totally changed organs, that GMOs are a major, if not THE major cause, behind it. You won’t hear about this in the media, because the power of Monsanto goes nearly everywhere. The following are just a few examples that I have collected:

My 40 year old female cousin died of breast cancer tonight…

Her parents raised her on a healthy diet, totally healthy. They took supplements, had a garden, went to church, didn’t drink or smoke EVER…and then one day she finds a lump.

She decided to treat it using natural methods like Vitamin C treatments, oxygenation, hydrogen peroxide, changing the body to alkaline, all under the supervision of natural healers and doctors…but she was also getting chemo treatments.

She ate an organic diet and cleansed weekly to flush the poison from her body and kept her immune system boosted to fight off infection. She was totally informed about modern day, alternative, cancer treatments and what she was doing to beat it.

A week and a half ago she was admitted into the hospital with severe pain from fluid gathering around her heart and lungs(the tumor area). Doctors drained her chest and tested the fluid and found it to be full of cancer cells, all of the sudden it spread, it had taken over.

A week and a half ago she was a beautiful, youthful 40 year old woman and today she is dead.

She looked 80 years old when I say her earlier today at the hospital. From 40 to 80 in a week and a half….What the —- is going on around here people?!

(Note: All you have to do is look again at the pictures of the tumors on the rats, and change to the organs from GMOs, and you will know).

On another post I read about a lady who walked into her boyfriend’s house, and found him dead in the middle of the living room. He was only 40 years old.

A lady I talked with in the line at the post office said that 5 people, all close to her and most of them under 50, had all died in the last month.

Another poster said that 6 people close to them, none of them particularly old, had all died within several months of each other.

Something is causing this. Vaccines are part of the cause, but GMOs are obviously deadly. The lamestream media will not tell you that GMOs are killing people. I urge you to totally get GMOs and all other toxins out of your life.

GMOs need to be banned totally, not just labelled. They kill. And the pollen from GMO plants goes everywhere, and is infecting non-GMO plants.

The dangers of GMOs is just one of the 55 chapters in the book that I spent 2 years writing- You’re not Fat, You’re Toxic – to help you save you and your family. If you don’t want to buy it, I encourage you to ask the library to obtain a copy:

Your not fat Your toxic

(click on above text to find out more)

TLB recommends you visit for more great/pertinent articles and information.

See featured article HERE

injected-boy 2

TLB Preface: Vaccines are not just an American issue, they are a global issue. When you look at the influence of The Gates Foundation, the World Health Organization and the tendrils the Mega Pharmaceutical Mafia have in just about every country on this planet, it is not hard to see the writing on the wall. Corporatism rules this planet today and one of the most influential of this cabal is Big Pharma.

Here is an article written by one of the most prolific and well researched Contributors to The Liberty Beacon project, Christina England. The article details laws, procedures and influences for vaccination in the United Kingdom … All that is needed for it to have been written for the United States, or many other countries, is that the name of the country be changed. We are all in danger, You, Me, Our Children and our Brothers and Sisters across this ever shrinking Global Community! Please read the information Christina provides here, because as usual it is comprehensive, compassionate and spot on …


By TLB Contributor: Christina England.

Late last year UK newspapers reported that in the future, doctors will be given the power to lecture any parent who refuses to have their child vaccinated with the MMR vaccine. This move is a part of a government campaign to boost falling vaccination rates in the UK. [1]

Critics argue that the move will intimidate parents, stating that parents want more choice. They feel that instead of bullying parents and making them feel as if big brother is watching them, the government should reintroduce the single vaccinations as an alternative to the MMR.

Parents Want Information and Choices

The Daily Mail reported:

“Under Department of Health plans, parents who refuse MMR would receive a general practitioner’s letter.

Doctors or nurses would then use an information pack sent by the Department of Health to 35,000 staff to make the case for the vaccine, says a report in the Nursing Standard journal.

A Department of Health spokesman said the plan was just one of a range of options being discussed in a move to get the message across.

He said, ‘Our research shows that parents want more information about MMR and that is what we are intending to provide.’”

Jackie Fletcher, from the vaccination campaign group JABS, whose son was awarded £90,000 after suffering severe brain damage as a result of the MMR, told the Mail that:

“Parents don’t trust the government’s advice on this, so why are they going to trust a doctor who is just going to read out what he’s been told to say?”

Mrs. Fletcher joins the growing number of parents calling for single vaccines and told reporters that parents want choice, not lectures.

I agree. However, does this choice also include choosing not to vaccinate?

Single Rubella Vaccine Includes Fetal Bovine (Cow) Serum and Numerous Side Effects

Mounting evidence suggests that the single measles, mumps and rubella vaccinations are no safer than the three-in-one MMR and are packed full of gruesome ingredients.

First, let us discuss MERUVAX® II (rubella live virus vaccine), the single rubella vaccine. [2]

The list of ingredients is enough to put anyone off. It includes:

  • RA 27/3 strain of live attenuated rubella virus
  • Fetal bovine serum
  • Human serum albumin
  • Neomycin
  • Hydrolyzed gelatin
  • Rubella virus
  • Sodium phosphate
  • Sodium chloride

Fetal bovine serum, for those parents who are not sure, is a common component of animal cell culture media. It is harvested from calf fetuses taken from pregnant cows during slaughter. To use this in vaccines, the serum has to be harvested by means of cardiac puncture. The procedure takes place without any form of anesthesia, which has to be not only cruel but also inhumane. [3]

Human serum albumin is the most abundant protein in human plasma and it is produced by the liver.

I felt that the first section of the rubella single vaccine leaflet was so unsavory that I would include it in full:

“MERUVAX® II (Rubella Virus Vaccine Live) is a live virus vaccine for vaccination against rubella (German measles).

MERUVAX® II is a sterile lyophilized preparation of the Wistar Institute RA 27/3 strain of live attenuated rubella virus. The virus was adapted to and propagated in WI-38 human diploid lung fibroblasts.

The growth medium is Minimum Essential Medium (MEM) [a buffered salt solution containing vitamins and amino acids and supplemented with fetal bovine serum] containing human serum albumin and neomycin. Sorbitol and hydrolyzed gelatin stabilizer are added to the individual virus harvests.

The cells, virus pools, fetal bovine serum, and human albumin are all screened for the absence of adventitious agents. Human albumin is processed using the Cohn cold ethanol fractionation procedure.

The reconstituted vaccine is for subcutaneous administration. Each 0.5 mL dose contains not less than 1,000 TCID50 (tissue culture infectious doses) of rubella virus.

Each dose of the vaccine is calculated to contain sorbitol (14.5 mg), sodium phosphate, sucrose (1.9 mg), sodium chloride, hydrolyzed gelatin (14.5 mg), human albumin (0.3 mg), fetal bovine serum (

Before reconstitution, the lyophilized vaccine is a light yellow compact crystalline plug. MERUVAX® II, when reconstituted as directed, is clear yellow.”

According to the fact sheet, adverse reactions to this vaccination appear extensive and include:

  • Fever
  • Syncope
  • Headache
  • Dizziness
  • Malaise
  • Irritability
  • Vasculitis
  • Diarrhea
  • Vomiting
  • Nausea
  • Thrombocytopenia
  • Purpura
  • Regional lymphadenopathy
  • Leukocytosis
  • Arthritis
  • Arthralgia
  • Myalgia
  • Encephalitis
  • Guillain-Barré syndrome (GBS)
  • Polyneuritis
  • Polyneuropathy
  • Paresthesia
  • Sore throat
  • Cough
  • Rhinitis
  • Stevens-Johnson syndrome
  • Erythema multiforme
  • Urticaria
  • Rash
  • Pruritis
  • Burning/stinging at injection site
  • Wheal and flare
  • Redness (erythema)
  • Pain
  • Induration
  • Nerve deafness
  • Otitis media
  • Optic neuritis
  • Papillitis
  • Retrobulbar neuritis
  • Conjunctivitis

Anaphylaxis and anaphylactoid reactions have been reported, as well as related phenomena such as angioneurotic edema (including peripheral or facial edema) and bronchial spasm in individuals with or without an allergic history.

Death from various, and in some cases unknown, causes has been reported rarely following vaccination with measles, mumps, and rubella vaccines.

These are the adverse reactions that Merck will actually admit to; of course, the real list of side effects is probably far longer. As the list was so extensive, I copied it directly from the fact sheet. I particularly loved the way that Merck added ‘death’ at the end under the heading entitled ‘other’ as if they thought they had better add it in as an extra to cover themselves.

The upside to all this, of course, is if your child does come through this vaccination unscathed, then according to our governments, the medical profession and the pharmaceutical industry, your children are unlikely to catch rubella. But then again, there is no guarantee.

Single Measles Vaccine Has Been a Major Safety Concern for Decades

The ingredients of the single measles vaccine manufactured by Sanofi are as impressive as the ingredients of the rubella vaccine and include hyperattenuated live measles virus, human albumin, neomycin, lactose, and others. [4]

The single measles vaccine fairs no better as far as adverse reactions are concerned, either. The list of reactions seems endless and includes:

  • Redness
  • Local pain
  • Swelling at the injection site
  • Allergic reactions such as rash and urticaria
  • Anaphylactic shock
  • A rise in temperature to around 38-39 degrees C
  • A temporary rash may occur 5-12 days after vaccination
  • Erythema multiforme
  • Congestion
  • Coughing
  • Inflammation of the throat
  • Eye infection: may occur 5-12 days after immunization
  • High fever (over 103 degrees F/39.4 degrees C)
  • Diarrhea
  • Transient convulsions
  • Syncope
  • Thrombocytopenia up to two months after vaccination
  • Purpura
  • Vasculitis
  • Optic neuritis
  • Retrobulbar neuritis
  • Papillitis
  • Retinitis
  • Ocular palsies
  • Guillain-Barre syndrome
  • Ataxia
  • Subacute Sclerosing Panencephalitis (SSPE)

There have been major safety concerns surrounding the single measles vaccine for decades. In 2010, I discovered secret government documents revealing that the UK government had been aware from as far back as 1972 that the measles vaccine was causing children to suffer from the debilitating neurological disorder subacute sclerosing panencephalitis (SSPE).

SSPE is a degenerative neurological condition which affects a person’s behavior, memory and coordination, leading to fits, blindness and eventually death.

To read about the secret group that the UK government set up to deal with the growing problem and exactly what information the leading professionals sitting on that group revealed and much more, it is advisable to read my article on the subject, titled At Last! Government Documents Locked Up for 30 Years Proving This Vaccine Unsafe Finally Revealed. [5]

At Least Two Single Mumps Vaccines Have Been Banned

Early in 2012, I wrote an article stating that the single mumps vaccine Medi-Mumps was available in private clinics from June 2012. [6]

Medi-Mumps, manufactured by Almac Pharma, was said to be cultured on canine kidney cells instead of chick embryos, making it suitable for those children allergic to eggs, but sadly, my research found that instead it appeared to be less suitable for those children allergic to dogs.

For those of you who are unaware, although the mumps vaccine was available in private clinics until 2009, it was only being offered as an unlicensed product. This was because if a parent specifically requests a single vaccine, a private clinic needs to apply to the MHRA for permission to use an unlicensed product in the patient’s name.

Ms. Blears referenced this in the Hansard document dated December 4, 2002:

“Single mumps vaccines being prescribed and administered, as part of single measles, mumps and rubella vaccination programs such as MMR SepVax, are unlicensed imported medicines. Medicine legislation allows a doctor or dentist to prescribe an unlicensed medicine to meet the special clinical needs of his individual patients, on his direct personal responsibility.” [7]

Medi-Mumps has since been banned.

Was Medi-Mumps Banned Due To VacTruth’s Intervention?

Interestingly, since VacTruth’s intervention and a letter sent to the MHRA by an interested party, Medi-Mumps is no longer available at private clinics. [8, 9]

This is probably because our article mentioned the fact that Medi-Mumps was extremely similar to the banned mumps vaccine Pavivac that had also been cultured on canine kidney cells and manufactured in the Czech Republic.

However, Pavivac had been rejected by the CSM (Committee on the Safety of Medicines) in 2002 due to safety concerns. [10]

Shortly after the VacTruth article was published and the letter was sent by an interested party, it appears that the UK’s Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA) carried out an investigation into the MediMumps vaccine. In September 2012, they released the following statement:

“13 September 2012

The MHRA was made aware of information presented on the Children’s Immunisation Centre (CIC) website about Medi-Mumps and a related press release. The MHRA was concerned that the information provided an unbalanced view of the safety and efficacy of the vaccine because it did not mention the MHRA’s concerns and previous CSM advice or that the product was unlicensed.

We understood that the Medi-Mumps vaccine is manufactured from the same stock and processed in the same way as Pavivac mumps vaccine. The MHRA, acting on advice from an independent advisory committee, the Committee on Safety of Medicines (CSM), has for a number of years objected to the importation of the Pavivac product because there is insufficient information available to assure its safety, quality and efficacy. See statement from the committee on safety of medicines for more details.

CIC amended the websites to remove the information about Medi-Mumps.
Date case raised: 3 April 2012
Date action agreed: 2 May 2012
Date of publication: 13 September 2012” [11]

Since Medi-Mumps and Pavivac vaccines were banned, single mumps vaccines have become thin on the ground.

Therefore, I have been unable to give a long list of adverse reactions, but that does not mean that single mumps vaccines do not produce any.


It is apparent that our vaccinations include some very strange and unsavoury ingredients. The three single vaccines were certainly not the only vaccines I came across containing parts of animals, humans and insects. In fact, I found a huge list of them on a PDF which I have included as extra research.

For some reason, many parents are perfectly happy to have their tiny babies vaccinated with everything from insect cells to pigs’ gelatin, without a moment’s hesitation, arguing that the vaccines are to protect their children and keep them strong and healthy. Others remain totally unaware of the vaccines’ contents and may have religions banning abortions and the consumption of many of the vaccines contents.

I believe that:

1. Parents should be given the product insert to read in full before they have their child vaccinated.
2. Parents should be made fully aware of what the vaccine contains before vaccination.
3. Parents should be made fully aware of all possible adverse reactions the vaccine can cause.
4. Parents should sign a consent form before their child is vaccinated.

Like Jackie Fletcher, I believe that parents should be allowed to have choices, not only between the MMR vaccine or the single vaccines, but also whether or not they wish to have their child vaccinated at all.

If you wish to continue your research on the dangers of vaccines, TLB highly recommends you visit Vactruth for more great/pertinent articles and information.



Written by: Daniel Jennings


West Virginia’s state Supreme Court delivered a landmark victory to opponents of Monsanto, and citizens who were impacted by the company’s pollution are now receiving big payouts.

The court approved a settlement last year that will require the agribusiness giant to spend $93 million to clean up toxic contamination created by the production of herbicides and other products in the small town of Nitro, West Virginia, and this month, the settlement was finalized. The toxic herbicides Monsanto produced in Nitro included Agent Orange, the notorious herbicide used during the Vietnam War.

Dioxin, a chemical byproduct from Agent Orange, is believed to cause serious health problems.

Monsanto operated a herbicide factory in Nitro from 1948 to 2004.

“It’s been a real long haul,” attorney Stuart Calwell told The Charleston Gazette. Calwell represented Nitro area residents in a class action suit that prompted Monsanto to make the settlement.

New Survival Seed Bank™ Lets You Plant A Full Acre Crisis Garden!

“The politics of dioxin has been bitterly debated since the Vietnam War, but … we know that there is a health issue there and hopefully people will get their houses cleaned and the risk will come to an end and those exposed in the past will have the benefit of keeping an eye on their health.”

What Monsanto Agreed To In Settlement

“After years of litigation, now the benefits exist,” Calwell’s associate, David Carriger, said of the settlement. “However, we have a small hurdle. We need people to fill out the registration in order to get those benefits.” Here is what the settlement will require Monsanto to do:

  • Spend $9 million to clean 4,500 homes around Nitro in order to remove dioxin contaminated dust.
  • Spend $21 million on testing of people for dioxin.
  • Set up a system that will monitor citizens for dioxin for 30 years.
  • Spend another $63 million on additional tests if necessary.
  • Conduct medical testing on anybody who lived in the Nitro area between Jan. 1, 1948, and Sept. 3, 2010. Persons will have to present evidence that they lived in the Nitro area to be eligible to participate in the program.
  • Set up an office in Nitro to help residents register for the program. The program will be administered by Charleston attorney Thomas Flaherty, who was appointed by the court.
  • Residents will still have the right to file their own lawsuits against Monsanto if medical tests show harm. Current and former Monsanto employees will not be able to participate in the settlement.

The US Supreme Court cleared the way this year for the settlement to take effect by refusing to hear a challenge brought by some Nitro area residents who disagree with the settlement. Monsanto agreed to the settlement in 2012 to prevent a costly six month trial in West Virginia state courts. This case did not involve glyphosate, another controversial toxin used in Monsanto herbicides such as Roundup.


Read article here:

TLB recommends you read more great/pertinent articles here:

vax-pushers 2

By: Sandy Lunoe

We know that statistics may be twisted into the realm of absurdity, but most of us seem to accept them when considering the safety of medicines.

Here’s a typical example: We ask a doctor who recommends a vaccine about the risk of contracting Guillain-Barré syndrome (GBS), a serious autoimmune condition which may evolve into paralysis. The doctor may assure us that the risk is “probably only one additional case in each million persons vaccinated.”

Why should we accept this statistic without question?

Where do these safety statistics come from? They come from epidemiologists and statisticians whose interest is in the promotion of vaccines and who manipulate the statistics so that vaccines appear to be safer than they are in reality.

How Statistics are Misused to Make Vaccines “Safe”

Dr. Lawrence B. Palevsky, a widely respected pediatrician in New York, gives a more detailed explanation:

“It is often stated that there is normally no higher number of GBS after vaccination than is found in the population as a whole: This statement is more than dubious. We are told that vaccine safety studies are designed to evaluate whether or not vaccines contribute to the development of adverse events.


When authorities accumulate data in a cohort of people who are given a vaccine or a group of vaccines, they closely monitor them for a period of time to observe any symptoms of illness, usually 2-4 weeks. They then compare the incidence of any reported symptoms in the vaccine study group to the incidence of the reporting of these symptoms in the general population. The incidence of symptoms in the general population is normally referred to as the background rate.


In every vaccine study performed in this way by the vaccine manufacturers, they have come to conclude, through their statistical analyses, that the symptoms reported in the study group after vaccination are no higher in incidence than the rate at which these symptoms would occur in the general population. Therefore, they conclude, the onset of these symptoms in the vaccinated study group is not necessarily due to an adverse reaction to the vaccination(s) being studied. In other words, the symptoms in the vaccinated group were most likely to have occurred by chance, unrelated to the effects of the vaccines.

The next step in the process is to then conclude that the vaccine(s) being studied is(are) safe.


The vaccine manufacturers are using background data from the general population – A POPULATION THAT IS ALSO VACCINATED! (emphasis added)

In this type of study design, the investigators are studying a group of vaccinated people and comparing the data to a background population of people just like them, who are also vaccinated.

We can’t conclude anything about the vaccinated population in this type of study design because the data are being compared to themselves, and not to a set of data from a proper unvaccinated control group. Yet, this is the main type of study design that is used to evaluate vaccine safety. (emphasis added)


In order to do a proper study, investigators would need to accumulate data in a cohort of people who are given a vaccine or a group of vaccines, by monitoring them for a period of time to observe any symptoms of illness, and comparing the incidence of the reported symptoms in the study group to the incidence of these symptoms that are reported in a cohort of people who are demographically similar, and who are unvaccinated. (emphasis added)

This is the type of study that would help us to understand the frequency and severity of adverse reactions that could possibly occur in a vaccinated population.

This type of study, however, has never been done by the vaccine manufacturers. Many attempts to set up this type of scientific study have been thwarted by the courts, the vaccine manufacturers, medical organizations, and the ideology that vaccines are nothing other than safe and effective, and appropriately studied with the highest of scientific standards.”

This method involving misuse of statistics applies not only in the case of GBS but generally regarding other serious, so-called “rare conditions.”

GBS and Other Adverse Reactions to Vaccines are Under-Reported

Another significant factor which contributes towards the false impression that GBS is rare after vaccinations: The number of actual GBS cases after vaccinations is grossly under-reported.

Only a small percentage of adverse reactions are reported to VAERS (US Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System). It may be as low as one to two percent. Here are some of the reasons why adverse reactions to vaccines are not properly reported:

  • Not all doctors are trained in reporting adverse reactions.
  • It may be difficult to link the reaction with the vaccine. ( Autoimmune conditions may present themselves up to several years after a vaccine.)
  • The adverse reaction, for example, an autoimmune condition, may not even be stated in product information.
    GBS may be incorrectly diagnosed as another condition.
  • There is minimal incentive for doctors to report because it takes time and work.
  • Doctors may fear being contacted by the manufacturer.
  • It may be unpleasant for doctors to admit to patients that a vaccine which was recommended was the cause of the condition.
  • Citizens and doctors are encouraged to report to the manufacturers. This is surely a case of the fox guarding the hen house.

Vaccine safety activist Barbara Loe Fisher wants doctors to file reports directly to VAERS, not through the manufacturer. She says manufacturers’ reports are often incomplete, citing a report in the Journal of the American Medical Association which says that while 68 percent of the adverse event reports on Gardasil came from manufacturers, nearly 90 percent of them could not be tracked or investigated because they lacked the most basic contact information.


Due to both misleading statistics and gross under-reporting, we are given the false impression that Guillain-Barré syndrome and many other serious conditions are rare after vaccinations.

“If medical statistics were compiled by statisticians who had no interest in the outcome, the drug industry would topple into the dust.” – Robert Catalano

Photo Credit

TLB recommends you Visit Vactruth for more great/pertinent articles and information.

See featured article HERE


By TLB Contributor: Dave Hodges.

Our children will be going back to school anywhere from 3-6 weeks. Over that time span, I plan on publishing some helpful tips on protecting your child while in the care of others, namely the schools. Most schools do an excellent job watching out for the children under their care. However, there are some who have an agenda, and that agenda is not always in the best interest, safety and welfare of our children. Therefore, I am going to take these opportunities and share my concerns with you in the hope that you can benefit from what I have managed to learn.

In this article, we are going to look at a phenomenon which is forcing many unneeded medications down the throats of our children, and sometimes, with devastating consequences. The following paragraphs express my concerns over a variety of medications that our children are being forced to take.

The Ritalin Conspiracy

Let’s make up a brain disorder, which parallels normal restlessness of children and then transform a dangerous drug, methamphetamine, and get as many kids on the drug as possible. It is good work if you can find it and pharmaceutical companies like Merck and Eli Lilly are leading the way in medical fraud and in the name of record corporate profits,

The use of Ritalin has become so rampant, that even the DEA has become alarmed by the tremendous increase in the  prescribing of these drugs in recent years. Since 1990, prescriptions for methylphenidate have increased by 500%, while prescriptions for amphetamine for the same purpose have increased 400%. The American Pediatric Association claims Ritalin is over prescribed by 600%.

For well over a decade, many scientists have speculated that ADD drugs are dangerous and can cause serious injury and death. Etta Brown, a licensed educational psychologist and author of Learning Disabilities: Understanding the Problem and Managing the Challenges explained in response to her study that drugs like Ritalin actually destroy the neural function in children’s brains. As a result, children who have undergone treatment with Ritalin will actually have a much more difficult time processing information and learning new things. This kind of defeats the purpose of getting children to sit still in school while placed in a zombified state.

Brown further reported that Ritalin is responsible for the development of a permanent tic in the face, neck, and head of many of the children who have taken or are taking it. Ironically, Ritalin is responsible for causing far more serious neurological damage than the problems it is alleged to treat. Meta analyses studies over the years have revealed that while drugs like Ritalin visibly place children into a trance like state, these drugs destroy the vulnerable, delicate and developing nervous systems which can and does permanently cripple their ability to function as normal human beings.

The Gardasil Conspiracy

In an era when Gardasil has resulted in needless tragedy for over 40,000 children who have been vaccinated by well intentioned doctors who are ignorant of the side effects, we are now witnessing states like California mandating the forced inoculation of young girls with Gardasil.

What the medical establishment is not telling you is that thousands of girls are having adverse reactions to the HPV Vaccines, some have even died. At last count, at least 103 lives have been lost to Gardasil. This is a brilliant strategy being invoked by California. Let’s kill the girls, thus preventing them from having sex, thus, preventing STD’s.

You remember MERCK don’t you?  They were the creator of the wonder death drug,  Vioxx. This is the same Merck, who only after intense pressure from the medical community and the media decided to pull the dangerous drug, Vioxx, from the market after an estimated 140,000 adverse reactions had already occurred. And the pulling of Vioxx occurred only after a safety trial was stopped because there was an undeniable and increased risk for serious cardiovascular dangers such as heart attacks and strokes from using the drug.

Merck has been no less reckless in their administration of Gardasil as they were with Vioxx. First and foremost, Merck and the Food and Drug Administration’s clinical trials have been called into question for blatant fraud committed during the required FDA testing period. Both the control group and the experimental group, in the clinical trials, were given the aluminum adjuvant contained in the Gardasil. Control group and experimental group comparisons are done to ensure public safety from adverse side effects as much as possible. In this case, it would have be standard practice to provide the control group with a saline solution instead of the aluminum adjuvant in order to determine the risk posed by the adjuvant given to the experimental group. In failing to follow these research norms, Merck and the FDA have endangered the public health.

These research protocols violate every known tenant to proper research; it represents an air of unprofessionalism, not to mention criminal fraud, which clearly demonstrates collusion to commit fraud against the general public on behalf of Merck as sponsored by the FDA. In fact, Judicial Watch was forced to file a lawsuit under the Public Records Act in order to obtain the obfuscated side effect results as the FDA tried to cover up their own complicity in this research fraud by refusing to release the relevant documents.

Gardasil is marketed as a vaccine that prevents cancer, but the drug has not been evaluated for the potential to cause cancer or genotoxicity. Gardasil is a prophylactic, preventative vaccine and is of absolutely no value in the treatment of a pre-existing HPV infection. It is neither a cancer vaccine nor a cure; yet, the public has been led to believe that this is the case. The New England Journal of Medicine found that there remains no conclusive proof that Gardasil altered the course of HPV-16 or HPV-18 infection for which the patient was symptomatic prior to the administration of the first dose. In other words, this is fraud in the first degree. Gardasil is the most costly vaccine ever to be approved by the FDA. However, its long-term effectiveness is not known and several estimates state that Gardasil’s life as a vaccine could be only two to three years. This opens up the distinct possibility that a Gardasil vaccinated child will require several booster shots which will undoubtedly increase the bottom line for Merck, but the risk for side-effects among the vaccinated could increase exponentially with each successive vaccination.

The VAERS reports show that as many as eighteen people have died after receiving Gardasil. The VAERS reports document identifies 38 reports of Guillain-Barre Syndrome among juvenile females who previously received the Gardasil vaccine. Guillain-Barre Syndrome is a catastrophic illness that attacks the nervous system which can and often does result in paralysis. Ironically, Gardasil is being developed against only four types of HPV. However, there is over 100 strains of HPV, 30 of which are transmitted sexually. Just what could have Governor Brown and Atkins been thinking?

Do you not think that this is the first time that this kind of dangerous medical fraud has been and will be visited upon your children for profit and political career advancement?  Think again! The American Academy of Pediatrics recommends that boys of the age of 11 to 12 years should be vaccinated with the vaccine against HPV with the Gardasil vaccination. Even my doctors are serving the Big Pharma agenda, as evidenced by the fact that my son’s former pediatrician relentlessly tried to give my then 11 year old son the Gardasil injection. When I presented the good doctor with some of the data contained in this report, he replied “your ideas are not contained within the mainstream of medicine.” Since when is scientific research required to reflect the mainstream of the Big Pharma agenda? The moral of this story is to fire your doctor and find a health care provider who is committed to the welfare of their patients.

A recent  investigation found the number of prescriptions for psychotropic drugs for US children more than doubled between 1995 and 2000 and it also revealed that foster children are prescribed such psychotropic drugs at a rate 12 times higher than other children on Medicaid.

Over one million American children now take psychotropic medications each year, and tens of thousands of them are under the age of five. Across the United States, 7.5 % of children aged 6-17 take a prescribed psychotropic medication for over-diagnosed mental health difficulties.

Psychotropic Drugs, Children and Violent Enacting Behavior

Despite 22 international drug regulatory warnings on psychiatric drugs which have meticulously cited effects of mania, hostility, violence and even homicidal ideation, and dozens of high profile shootings tied to psychiatric drug use, there has yet to be a federal investigation on the link between psychiatric drugs and acts of senseless violence. At least 34 school shootings and/or school-related acts of violence have been committed by those taking or withdrawing from psychiatric drugs resulting in 166 wounded and 78 killed.

Brain Damage Resulting from the Use of Psychotropic Drugs

The clinical effect of chronic exposure to psychoactive substances, including psychiatric drugs, produces effects very similar to those of close-head injury due to traumatic brain injury injury (TBI). In laymen’s terms, psychotropic drugs, given to a developing brain, which occurs until about age 19, can permanently change the brain. If the structure of the brain is changed, the performance of the brain also changes.

The introduction of psychotropic drug use for children under 18  can impact memory, mood, cognitive functioning, imitate dementia, emulate Postconcussive Syndrome and it can even imitate the effects of Traumatic Brain Injury. These drugs are highly addictive and withdrawal can lead to violent enactive behavior and suicide. Generalized or global harm to the brain from any cause produces very similar mental effects. The brain and its associated mental processes respond in a very similar fashion to injuries from causes as diverse as electroshock. Children who take these drugs can emotionally present with wartime PTSD, lead to chronic abuse of alcohol and street drugs, lead to a long-term exposure to psychiatric polydrug treatment, and long-term exposure to particular classes of psychiatric drugs including stimulants, benzodiazepines, lithium and antipsychotic drugs.

The effects of these presenting conditions can prove devastating to those children who grow up and try and obtain health insurance.

References for the Scholarly Research Studies Presented In the Preceding Paragraphs

L. Zhou, K. Huang, A. Kecojevic, A. Welsh and V. Koliatsos, Evidence that serotonin reuptake modulators increase the density of serotonin in the forebrain, Journal afNeurochemistry 96 (2006), 396-406.

J C.M. Fisher, Neurological fragments. II. Remarks on anosognosia, confabulation. memory, and other topics; and an appendix on self-observation, Neurol39 (1989), 127-132.

 RJ. McClelland, G.w. Fenton and W. Rutherford, The postconcussional syndrome  revisited, Journal of Royal Society Of Medecine 87 (1994), 508-510.

You can see that based upon the dates of the research studies, we have known about these effects for some time and this knowledge has done nothing to dissuade the use of these dangerous drugs on the young.

Government and School Collusion

In April of 2002, by Executive Order, President George W. Bush convened a 22 member panel which sought to identify policies that could be implemented by all levels of government which would promote successful mental health treatment for all children and adults.In July of 2003, the NFC formally recommended that schools were in the best position to commence the screening of all Americans beginning with America’s students and school employees. The NFC implemented their recommendations, in November of 2004, with a $20 million dollar appropriation.

This led to the creation of a program called Teen Screen, which made its way into 43 states, until the public outcry arose and the public demanded an end to the program. This program was beset by such unscrupulous events such bribing kids to take psychological exams at schools which produced an 80% false positive rate. The children would then be referred, often without parental notice, to greedy psychiatrists who were all to willing to prescribe dangerous psychotropic drugs.

In 2009, I interviewed Theresa Rhoades on my talk show to discuss her lawsuit victory, on behalf of her daughter Chelsea, in a Teen Screen related matter. The Rhoades judgment did much to awaken the nation. As a result many protest groups formed in an effort to shut down Teen Screen.

A brief, but more detailed description of the Teen Screen Program can found here.

There has been a stunning development. Teen Screen, despite massive government funding from two administrations and the National Institute of Health, is shutting down operations. They have succumbed to the massive outcry against this evil being perpetrated against our children. Bowing to public pressure, Teen Screen closed its doors and the abuse has temporarily been mitigated. However, can this really be the end of the story? Do you not think that Big Pharma will not return with a suitcase of money for each school district to drug your children? Some school districts will say no to this abuse and shoddy science. Some will not. It is your job to make sure your child’s school acts responsibly.

It is up to each parent to realize that your children are not the property of Big Pharma, the schools or the government. It is your duty as their parent to say no to this abuse and not permit your child to become a victim and turn our children into docile and manageable children.


TLB recommends you visit Dave at The Common Sense Show for more great/pertinent commentary, articles, radio shows and information

See featured article and read comments HERE




Do pharmaceutical companies believe in their product?


They believe in money and power – they answer only to their stock holders. If they believed in their products, they wouldn’t require legal protection from their product harming children through Public Law 99-660 (the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986). Furthermore, they wouldn’t need to force parents to vaccinate their child through mandates (that’s why you need an exemption).

I preface this article with the following, because Big Pharma and the pro-vaccine lobby know their ship is sinking. Parents are investigating vaccines and asking doctors questions they cannot answer in record numbers, which is shooting holes in Pharma’s bottom line.

How do you plug up these holes to stop the ship from sinking? The answer is quite simple: copy what parents are doing in the anti-vaccine movement.

Enter a blog called Voices for Vaccines.

Perhaps you have seen the recent story hosted on the website Voices for Vaccines entitled, Growing Up Unvaccinated?

As you can probably guess from the title, it is a story of a mother who grew up unvaccinated. The woman in the story changed her mind in adulthood and decided vaccines were really beneficial to her health. [1] While this mother converted to the religion of vaccinology made headlines, there is an even bigger story underneath the surface if you just scratch at it a little.

If you haven’t guessed by now, it has to do with the relationship between the Voices for Vaccines website and the pharmaceutical industry.

The website is a marketing scheme for pro-vaccine interests, no matter how much money or artificial it is. You need to know who owns the website and understand the question, “Who influences the Voices for Vaccines website?” or, put in a different way, “Who benefits?”

Let’s get started.

Fact #1: Task Force Owns the Voices for Vaccines Website

You should know that the Voices for Vaccines website is owned by the Task Force for Global Health, the third largest charity in the United States. Voices for Vaccines claims that it is “a parent-led organization that supports and advocates for on-time vaccination and the reduction ofvaccine-preventable disease .” [2]

While the administrators of the website are noted as being two mothers, the energy, as we shall see, is channeled by larger forces.


Fact #2: Task Force is the Third Largest Charity in US

The third largest charity in the United States brings home $1.66 billion a year, according to Forbes. [3] Yet, if you’re not from the Atlanta, Georgia, area, chances are you probably haven’t heard of the Task Force for Global Health.

This fact alone should tell you there is big money involved; you’ll see where the funds come from.

Fact #3: Task Force Employees Work For Emory University

Now that you know the Task Force for Global Health owns the website, it’s time to step into the deeper end of the pool.

Before I show you who is influencing the website, you must know Task Force employees are actually working for Emory University. The situation is a bit more complex when you look at the Task Force’s IRS Tax Form 990.

Page 49 of their 2011 document states, “The Task Force for Global Health Inc. is an affiliate of Emory University, and as such, all Task Force employees are in fact Emory University employees. For both the President and Executive Vice President, Emory University includes these positions in its annual market review of compensated professionals in these categories …” [4]

We’ll come back to this important point in a bit, as you’ll see most of their leadership and members have some affiliation with Emory (and also the Centers for Disease Control).


Fact #4: Proximity of Task Force, Emory University, and CDC

We haven’t discussed the Centers for Disease Control connection yet, but we will.

Let’s take a look at how closely the following three organizations are connected to each other. According to Google Maps, the Task Force for Global Health is located 2.6 miles from Emory University, and the Centers for Disease Control are located on essentially the same campus.

By itself, the proximity of all of the organizations means little. But there’s more to the story.

You’ll notice an intimate relationship between Emory University and the Centers for Disease Control.


Fact #5: Influence of Scientific Advisory Committee

To understand who is controlling the energy for Voices for Vaccines, and the Task Force organization at large, you need to understand their relationships and affiliations. It’s enough to make your head spin, so that is why at the end of this article I am providing a mind map graphic to make this a bit easier for you.

Here is an example of what I mean.


Alan Hinman is the director for various positions within the Task Force, including his leadership role for the Voices for Vaccines website. The IRS Form 990 for 2011 states he was paid $188,453 for his work. While the program Voices for Vaccines may not accept funding from pharmaceutical companies or government grants, he has his fingers in other pots that do.

Here are a few facts about Task Force director and Scientific Advisory Member Alan Hinman [5]:

  • He is on the Scientific Advisory board for Voices for Vaccines.
  • He is director of Task Force Program Accelerated Measles Mortality Reduction Improving Routine Immunizations in Africa (AMMRIRIA) which is funded by the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation.
  • He is director of Task Force Program Rabies Vaccine/Immune Globulin Emergency Stockpile (RaVaGES) which is funded by Novartis Pharmaceuticals.
  • He is an adjunct professor at Emory University.
  • He was a former Centers for Disease Control Epidemic Intelligence Service Officer.
  • He was the Director of the Immunization Division at the Centers for Disease Control.
  • He is on the Scientific Advisory board for pro-vaccine organization Every Child by Two, with Dr. Paul Offit. [6]

Here is more about Scientific Advisory Member Paul Offit:

  • He is on the Scientific Advisory board for Voices for Vaccines.
  • He holds a patent on a Rotavirus vaccine with Stanley Plotkin (Mr. Plotkin is also an advisory member). [7]
  • He worked with vaccine manufacturer, Merck, to create the vaccine and receives royalties. [8]

  • He has served as both a paid and unpaid member of a scientific advisory board at Merck. [9]
  • He was a former Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) member for the Centers for Disease Control.
  • He is on the Scientific Advisory board for pro-vaccine organization Every Child by Two, with Alan Hinman. [6]
  • He is on the Advisory Board for the Immunization Action Coalition (IAC) with Stanley Plotkin, led by Deborah Wexler. [10]
  • He is the director of the Vaccine Education Center at the Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia. Of interest, Deborah Wexler (IAC) and Amy Pisani (Every Child By Two) are also advisory board members for the Vaccine Education Center. [11]

And more about Scientific Advisory Member Deborah Wexler:

  • She is on the Scientific Advisory board for Voices for Vaccines.
  • She is the executive director for the Immunization Action Coalition. [12]
  • The Immunization Action Coalition receives funding from the Centers for Disease Control (CDC Grant No. 5U38IP000290) and pharmaceutical companies. [13]
  • She is an advisory board member for the Vaccine Education Center at the Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia. [11]

Lastly, Scientific Advisory Member Stanley Plotkin. He is well-accomplished within the vaccine community, so here are just a few salient items about him:

  • He is on the Scientific Advisory board for Voices for Vaccines.
  • He is on the Advisory board for the Immunization Action Coalition (IAC). [13]
  • He worked for the Epidemic Intelligence Service of the Centers for Disease Control. [14]
  • He was a former Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) member for the Centers for Disease Control.
  • He is an Executive Advisor to Sanofi Pasteur. [15]
  • He is on the Board of Directors for Dynvax. [15]
  • He was Director of Infectious Diseases and Senior Physician at the Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia. [15]
  • He was Professor of Virology at the Wistar Institute. [16]
  • He holds a patent on a Rotavirus vaccine with Paul Offit. [7]

Fact #6: Task Force Board of Directors Have Relationship to CDC / Emory University

You should know that the Voices for Vaccines website falls underneath the Task Force “umbrella.” This means that obviously Director Alan Hinman takes his marching orders from a higher authority.

Even if there are a few members who are on the Emory payroll, it is important to see the relationship between Emory and the CDC with the other board members as well.

On the graphic below, the “red star” icon next to the name mean there is an association to Emory University. A “blue person” icon indicates a relationship to the Centers for Disease Control.


Board of Directors

  1. Jane Fugate Thorpe, JD, Chair: Former Emory University Board Member [17]
  2. Paula Lawton Bevington, JD: Emory University Dean’s Council [18]
  3. James W. Curran, MD, MPH: Dean and Professor of Epidemiology at Emory University, Former Researcher at Centers for Disease Control [19]
  4. John B. Hardman, MD: Emory University Faculty [20]
  5. Charles H. “Pete” McTier: Emory University Graduate and Former Administrator, Board Member Centers for Disease Control Foundation [21]
  6. Mark L. Rosenberg, MD, MPP President and CEO: Emory University Faculty, CDC’s National Center for Injury Prevention and Control [22]
  7. Carol C. Walters, Treasurer & Founder: Former Executive Assistant to the Assistant Director of Centers for Disease Control

Emeritus Members of Board of Directors

  1. William H. Foege, MD, MPH emeritus, Founder: Emory University Advisory Board Member and Faculty, Former Director for Centers for Disease Control
  2. Howard H. Hiatt, MD emeritus
  3. James T. Laney, PhD emeritus: Former President of Emory University [23]
  4. Former US Surgeon General David Satcher, MD, PhD emeritus: Honorary Degree from Emory University, Former Director for Centers for Disease Control, Board Member for Centers for Disease Control Foundation [24]

Fact #7: Task Force Started by Rockefeller, UNICEF, WHO, United Nations, and World Bank

Looking at how The Task Force for Global Health was started is also important. According to their web page, they were, “initially tapped to serve as a Secretariat for a consortium of global health organizations: UNICEF, WHO, The Rockefeller Foundation, The United Nations Development Programme, and the World Bank.” [25]

Understanding the motives of the Rockefeller family, as an example, is perhaps the best understood by author and researcher Lily E. Kay. She writes about the Rockefeller philosophy extensively in her book, The Molecular Vision of Life.

On page eight, she explains, “The motivation behind the enormous investment in the new (“Science of Man”) agenda was to develop the human sciences as a comprehensive explanatory and applied framework for social control grounded in the natural, medical, and social sciences.” (notation mine)

“Applied social control”, simply stated, is the misuse of any branch of commerce, science, law, politics, or religion for compliance to an ulterior motive held by those in power.

Lily Kay continues to elaborate, “With that agenda, the new biology (originally named “psychobiology”) was erected on the bedrock of the physical sciences in order to rigorously explain and eventually control the fundamental mechanisms governing human behavior, placing a particularly strong emphasis on heredity.

The “heredity” that Lily Kay speaks of is a concept known as eugenics, or better known in today’s age as genetics. [26]

Fact #8: Emory Owns Stock in Vaccine Company

Emory University stands to gain financially from vaccine research. The university owns twenty percent stock in a vaccine company called GeoVax. [27]

If you look into this company further, you will see the complex set of relationships between Emory University, the CDC, and pharmaceuticals. Dr. Harriet Robinson, co-founder of GeoVax, developed AIDS vaccine technology in her laboratory with researchers from the Centers for Disease Control during her time at Emory University. [28]

Fact #9: Pharma Pays Emory University

As a side note, Big Pharma payouts to Emory University are not a secret.

Emory University and some of their employees receive hundreds of thousands of dollars from pharmaceutical companies. [29] This certainly does not make their stance regarding vaccines a philosophical one. Theirs is backed with dollars.

Go to ProPublica’s Docs for Dollars program and do a search for “Emory University.”

Fact #10: Programs Funded by Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation

The Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation is a financial contributor to several programs that the Task Force for Global Health operates. [30] To be noted, William H. Foege, founder of Task Force for Global Health, serves as the Senior Medical Advisor for the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation. [31]

  • Accelerated Measles Mortality Reduction Improving Routine Immunizations in Africa (AMMRIRIA)
  • Polio Antivirals Initiative
  • International Trachoma Initiative
  • Neglected Tropical Diseases Support Center

Fact #11: Programs Funded by Pharma

Programs for The Task Force for Global Health is also heavily funded by pharmaceutical companies. [30]

  • Rabies Vaccine/Immune Globulin Emergency Stockpile (RaVaGES) – Novartis
  • Children Without Worms – Johnson & Johnson, GlaxoSmithKline
  • International Trachoma Initiative – Pfizer
  • Mectizan Donation Program – Merck, GlaxoSmithKline
  • Neglected Tropical Diseases Support Center – GlaxoSmithKline

Fact #12: Task Force has Partnered with Merck for Over 25 Years

There is an old axiom that nothing in life is for free.

Merck has partnered with the Task Force for Global Health for over 25 years. Through the Mectizan Donation Program, they have donated free pharmaceuticals to eliminate river blindness in third world countries, like Uganda. [32]

Could it be possible Merck uses this “good will” in exchange for peddling their dangerous vaccines for experimental vaccine trials? As an example, in 2012 Merck announced a national Gardasil vaccination program in the Republic of Uganda. [33]

Additionally, in 2013 Merck has launched the Merck for Ugandan Mothers program, spending $500 million dollars to build their medical infrastructure, such as “enhancing” the role of local pharmacies. [34]


The Voices for Vaccines program at the Task Force for Global Health may be administered by a few mothers, but they are not the ones pulling the strings behind the scenes. The information in this article reveals who keeps the lights on for the website and the Task Force organization as a whole.

Furthermore, the past, present and future relationships with the Centers for Disease Control, Emory University, and pharmaceutical companies should immediately raise a red flag for any parent. Especially when the message calls for you to blindly trust doctors injecting dangerous chemicals into your child.

If you want to take action and become an informed parent, there is something you can do. Click on this link right now and download the vaccine ingredients.

As you can see, there are many other relationships not covered in this article. If you would like to investigate the relationships between the people mentioned in this story, you may do so through the mind map graphics below.

To save, right click on the graphic and select "save as."

A Summary


  5. Alan Hinman:…
  6. Alan Hinman:…
  7. Paul Offit:
  8. Paul Offit:
  9. Paul Offit:
  10. Paul Offit:
  11. Paul Offit:
  12. Deborah Wexler:
  13. Deborah Wexler:
  14. Stanley Plotkin:
  15. Stanley Plotkin:
  16. Stanley Plotkin:
  17. Jane Fugate Thorpe:…
  18. Paula Bevington:
  19. James W. Curran:
  20. John Hardman:…
  21. Pete McTier:…
  22. Mark Rosenberg:
  23. James Laney:
  24. David Satcher:…
  26. Edwin Black. War Against the Weak. Pg. xvii. Dialog Press. 2012.

Photo Credit

TLB recommends you visit Vactruth for more great/pertinent article and information.

See featured article and read comments HERE





Regardless of the agenda of the authors, and contrary to the misplaced media hype, the “quasi-experimental” study provides no scientific proof that decreased antidepressant use (because of the “Black box” warnings) increased the rate of suicide attempts.


Spin Doctors Attempt To Downplay Antidepressant Risks—New Study Claiming Black box warnings on antidepressants caused increase in suicide attempts fails to produce any evidence to substantiate this claim

By Kelly Patricia O’Meara
June 25, 2014

In an obvious attempt to remove the Food and Drug Administration’s (FDA) “Black box” warnings, placed on all antidepressants, a recently published study in the British Medical Journal (BMJ) claims that “safety warnings about antidepressants and widespread media coverage decreased antidepressant use, and there were simultaneous increases in suicide attempts among young people.”  While media outlets are covering this conclusion without question,  running headlines such as “Black Box Warnings Raise Suicide Attempts” or as USA Today wrote, “Warnings on Antidepressants May Have Backfired, ” none apparently read the study as it fails to produce any scientific evidence that supports its conclusions and, worse still, has little to do with suicide attempts at all.

In a nutshell, the BMJ study suggests that the “Black box” suicide warnings reduced the number of antidepressants being prescribed and, subsequently, there was an increase in suicide attempts in a certain age group over a specific time frame. The problem is neither their logic nor methodology support removing the FDA’s most severe warning on antidepressants.

Recall that in 2004, the FDA placed Black box warnings on all antidepressant drugs because the  agency found suicidality associated with antidepressant use. The FDA wasn’t the only drug regulatory agency to notice the antidepressant-suicide link—there have been 37 drug regulatory agency warnings from eleven countries—the United States, Canada, Japan, Australia, New Zealand, Ireland, Russia, Italy, Denmark, Germany, the United Kingdom—and the European Union, on antidepressant drugs causing suicide, suicide risk and attempts.

Despite mainstream media’s coverage of the BMJ article, a closer review reveals serious flaws and twisted logic:

For example, the study’s authors used a “validated proxy” (representation) for determining “suicide attempts.” Specifically the authors reviewed the number of people admitted to hospitals and emergency rooms due to “psychotropic drug poisonings.”

In other words, the people the study’s authors claim as suicide attempts, were already on psychotropic drugs. Whether these “drug poisonings” were accidental or not, it seems to argue more in favor of black box warnings then against them as these were people on psychotropic drugs (the authors did not bother to include what psychotropic drugs the people experiencing psychotropic drug poisonings were on).

To make this perfectly clear, the problem with this method is that the data does not actually prove that a person has been admitted because of an intended suicide attempt or, rather, whether there was an accidental overdose of psychotropic drugs. If there was an attempted suicide, one would expect the authors to make public which psychotropic drugs, or combinations, prompted the “psychotropic drug poisonings. One also would expect the authors would want to take this information into consideration as part of the conclusions. They didn’t.

Even if antidepressants weren’t involved (which the authors don’t disclose), but other psychotropic drugs were involved, one also would expect at least some interest and acknowledgment, questioning what role these other psychotropic drugs played in the drug poisonings and were these “poisonings” accidental or intended? They didn’t.

These are all valid questions. But none of them are addressed in the study.

In fact, Columbia Professor of Psychiatry, Mark Olfson, and Michael Schoenbaum of the National Institute of Mental Health (NIMH), responded to these conclusions saying, “Acute care visits for psychotropic drug poisoning is clearly an unreliable measure of suicide attempts.”

Olfson and Schoenbaum further explain that “a more plausible explanation for the reported findings is that the FDA warnings slowed prior growth in the rate of antidepressant treatment. In the following years, there was substantial—but likely unrelated—increase in emergency department visits and hospital admissions by young people in the United States related to the non-medical use of benzodiazepines, stimulants, and other psychotropic agents,” most of which “are not suicide attempts.”

Despite the study’s conclusion, data provided by other respected sources paints a very different picture.



According to data provided by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and IMS Health, between 2004-2007, there was a 20% decrease in the number of 10-17 year-olds on antidepressants, and a 14% decrease in the number of non-fatal self-harm events for this age group. There also was a 19% decrease in the number of completed suicides.

This is quite a different finding from the one provided in the BMJ study, which alleges a 21.7% increase in suicide attempts, and no change in completed suicides in this age group.

Internationally respected psychiatrist, Dr. David Healy, says of the study, “[I]f there has been a true increase in suicide attempts, this parallels an increase in the use of Mood Stabilizers, the clinical trials of which show almost exactly the same increases in suicidal act rates over placebo as is shown for the antidepressants.”

Healy concludes, “There is in summary so little basis in the data presented here for the argument being made that this paper perhaps offers better evidence of an agenda than anything else.”

While the study was financially supported by the NIMH, five of the seventeen authors have, or have had, financial conflicts of interest with pharmaceutical companies, including Eli Lilly, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Wyeth, Pfizer and Novartis. Three of these received direct research funding or grants from, or were consultants for, pharmaceutical companies, and two were authors of studies funded by pharmaceutical companies.


Kelly Patricia O’Meara is an award-winning former investigative reporter for the Washington Times’ Insight Magazine, penning dozens of articles exposing the fraud of psychiatric diagnosis and the dangers of the psychiatric drugs—including her ground-breaking 1999 cover story, “Guns & Doses,” exposing the link between psychiatric drugs and acts of senseless violence. She is also the author of the highly acclaimed book, Psyched Out: How Psychiatry Sells Mental Illness and Pushes Pills that Kill. Prior to working as an investigative journalist, O’Meara spent sixteen years on Capitol Hill as a congressional staffer to four Members of Congress. She holds a B.S. in Political Science from the University of Maryland.


Read article here:

TLB recommends you read more great/pertinent articles here:



Now, more than ever, powerful information is available to help parents decide if vaccines are safe for their child. Listed below are videos that parents should watch and consider prior to vaccinating their child.

1. Vaccine Nation

In this eye-opening 90 minute film, award winning film director Gary Null uncovers the less than illustrious history of vaccines. Null tackles crucial questions regarding the safety and efficacy of vaccines. While watching this film, one can’t help but question why vaccines are so fiercely coveted in today’s society.

2. Autism Causes: Mercury Poisoning From Vaccines & Environment

This 8 minute clip was produced by Larry Cook and features Dan Olmsted, co-author of The Age of Autism: Mercury, Medicine, and a Man-Made Epidemic.

In this clip, Olmstead addresses the vast appearance of autism, beginning around the same time ethylmercury first became widely used in pharmaceutical products. Olmstead emphasizes how autism is strongly suspected to be a man-made disorder and discusses the role vaccines play in contributing to a toxic overload in many children.

3. Are Vaccines REALLY Safe?

This video features Mary Tocco, with 30 years researching childhood vaccines under her belt, is considered an authority on the topic. Tocco not only questions the safety of administering numerous vaccines at a very young age, but challenges vaccine supporters to receive a weight adjusted dose of the very same toxins found in vaccines. We have yet to hear of anyone accepting the challenge.

4. Lethal Injection: The Story of Vaccination

This 2 1/2 hour film provides a telltale look at the lengthy history of vaccination. This film not only delves into the long-time controversy surrounding vaccines, but also encourages the audience to question the motives of those who stand to profit from continued mass-marketing campaigns.

5. Eric’s Life Before and After the Vaccine

This is the heart-wrenching account of a little boy named Eric, whom after receiving vaccines, suffered permanent and severe brain injury. This 5 minute video candidly provides a glimpse of what Eric’s life was like before vaccines, and how drastically different his life is now. The viewer becomes aware of the many challenges Eric’s family must now be faced with in caring for him.

6. Back to the Future: Parental Concerns About Vaccine Safety

Barbara Loe Fisher of the National Vaccine Information Center offers an insightful 6 minute commentary on the results of a 2009 survey, published in “Pediatrics”. The survey evaluates the vaccine safety concerns of parents. Fisher mentions more than half of the parents were worried about adverse events following vaccinations. The study also found that most patients rely on doctors for their information. Fisher states that when patients have suffered injuries following recommended vaccines, trust in doctors quickly fades.

7. Vaccine Autism Debate – “Except When They Do”

This 4 minute video comes to us from SafeMinds. Despite being told by experts that the vaccine-autism link has effectively been ruled out, many are not convinced.

The video highlights a well-known court case that ruled in favour of a girl who became autistic after receiving vaccines. The video also features a clip of ex CDC director Julie Gerberding admitting a link between vaccines and susceptible persons later developing autistic traits.

8. Merck Vaccine Expert Tells Truth About Vaccine Dangers

This controversial 10 minute recording features Merck vaccine expert, Maurice Hilleman. We are able to hear Hilleman admit to using monkeys possibly infected with HIV and testing positive for SV40, a known cancer causing virus. It is also revealed that vaccines were contaminated with SV40 caused by infected monkey organs being used in the manufacturing process.

9. The Dangers of Vaccines

A Jefferson City news channel does an excellent job providing an unbiased and open investigation of the link between vaccines and autism. This 8 minute video features input from chemist, Dr. Boyd Haley. It examines the role glutathione plays in eliminating heavy metals from the body and looks at the possible reasons infants are especially vulnerable to adverse effects from multiple vaccines.

10. How Mercury Kills the Brain

A university in Calgary has uncovered the damage trace amounts of mercury can inflict on the brain. This shocking 4 minute video explains how damage is caused and shows a real time clip of neurons being destroyed by mercury.


Photo Credit: Kevitivity

TLB recommends you visit Vactruth for more great/pertinent articles and information.

See featured article and read comments here:

  • Your support in the Liberty Beacon will be appreciated