PART 1 of 2
In Europe, just one vaccine is mandatory – for polio. In the US, children by the age of 18 are recommended to have 72 vaccines. State legislators are making this a reality step by step. Where does YOUR state stand?
by Pam Barker | TLB staff writer/analyst
The Pseudoscientific Justification for This Criminality
Without the mantra of herd immunity, these public-health officials would not be able to justify forced mass vaccinations. Dr. Russell Blaylock, neurologist
The Fallacy of Herd Immunity
The herd immunity argument is the classic collectivist defence that has long been made for a blanket approach to vaccinating citizens, and worth pondering closely. Based on the notion of what is in the best interests of the community, it’s argued that a large percentage (around 95%) must be vaccinated because that slows down the progression of a disease thus preventing the likelihood of an epidemic. (Note that an epidemic is believed to be a real, highly probable risk. Is it?) The few who haven’t been vaccinated are thus less likely to be infected, and if an unvaccinated person should fall ill, those who are vaccinated are more likely to be protected.
But this logic weakens the very claim that vaccines work. If you are vaccinated and vaccines do provide lifelong immunity as it is claimed by government and the vaccine manufacturers, why should there be any risk to you as a vaccinated person if others around you aren’t? This point never gets an answer. It can’t.
The herd immunity argument is automatically asserted by state health department chiefs. Writes Will Humble, former director of Arizona’s health department, now working with the University of Arizona’s Center for Population Science and Discovery:
Vaccines are the best, safest and most cost-effective way to prevent the spread of communicable diseases. We need just about everybody to get vaccinated to achieve herd immunity, which is what eliminates the spread of vaccine-preventable diseases.
Vaccine Immunity vs. Natural Immunity
Further, vaccines do not and cannot provide the same degree of protection as the body does once it has encountered and fought off a disease. This type of protection – natural immunity – does indeed last a lifetime and requires the mobilisation of the entire and multi-faceted bodily immune system to overcome a disease. Vaccine-induced immunity, however, is produced through injection directly into the muscle and bloodstream, which bypasses several of the initial ways the immune system has to counter foreign invaders. This type of immunity typically lasts just 2-10 years and only applies to humoral immunity, the kind produced by temporarily stimulating antibody production, not the innate immunity at the cellular level. In other words, a vaccine only affects a subset of the total immune response the human body is naturally capable of.
This is why they began, silently, to suggest boosters for most vaccines, even the common childhood infections such as chickenpox, measles, mumps, and rubella.
Then they discovered an even greater problem, the boosters were lasting for only 2 years or less. This is why we are now seeing mandates that youth entering colleges have multiple vaccines, even those which they insisted gave lifelong immunity, such as the MMR. The same is being suggested for full-grown adults. Ironically, no one in the media or medical field is asking what is going on. They just accept that it must be done.
Our level of health, he shows, cannot be due to historical vaccination levels among baby boomers, for example. This entire generation, comprising a substantial portion of the population, was vaccinated only early on in life, not repeatedly thereafter, which makes it impossible for this demographic group to have had any type of vaccine-induced immunity in the following decades. Further, the diseases against which the boomers were only temporarily protected did not rise in incidence as the theory predicts. ‘Vaccine-induced herd immunity’, he concludes, ‘is a lie used to frighten doctors, public-health officials, other medical personnel, and the public into accepting vaccinations.’
What is a risk, however, is viral shedding, which points the finger in the opposite direction, at the vaccinated, for the transmission of the diseases they are supposed to be protected against. Viral vaccines contain live viruses, albeit weak or attenuated strains, which will shed for a period of time through various bodily fluids because the vaccine recipient is actually undergoing a form of the infection itself, albeit mildly. Thus the vaccinated pose a risk to the unvaccinated, as was the case with the live polio vaccine.
- Thimerosal or mercury
- Aluminum salts
- Diploid cells (from fetuses)
- Animal cells (from various animals)
- MSG (monosodium glutamate)
- Peanut oil
- GMOs (genetically engineered viruses)
Freeman does an excellent job of critiquing each one for its shockingly harmful effects on the human body and I recommend reading this short article for yourself. She writes, ‘I have listed 10 of the most common toxic vaccine adjuvants below, and after reading about each one, please consider whether you think we can accurately call vaccines “good medicine”, given that these 10 adjuvants are being injected directly into the bloodstream (thus bypassing the digestive filters) of every vaccine patient who receives them.’
A glance at the CDC site, and I urge you to take a look for yourself, explains the reasons for six of these additives.
If you take these reasons together, you can see that they amount to what seems to be a responsible approach to product development: a product booster (aluminum) to develop a stronger and more lasting response to the vaccine; mercury to avoid contamination of the product by other bacteria; antibiotics to prevent germ growth in the product during storage; formaldehyde to prevent bacterial growth during production; and MSG to keep a product stable when exposed to light, heat or humidity.
On an editorial note, I can only claim a degree of speechlessness knowing what some of these adjuvants are.
But incredibly, it does get worse.
Nagalese, another adjuvant? Dr. Jeff Bradstreet
This is an incredibly sensitive and devastating hypothesis for Big Pharma.
Dr. Jeff Bradstreet died in mysterious circumstances in July of last year from a gunshot wound to the chest, along with close to a dozen other holistic doctors most of them operating in the same part of the US. He was investigating, among other things, the role of a naturally occurring protein, nagalese, in the young patients he was treating for autism. In search of a real cure motivated by his own son’s autism, he was willing to question all orthodoxy and had been researching the role vaccines played in autism before his sudden death.
According to Dr. Tim Smith, nagalese is ‘a protein made by all cancer cells and viruses … Nagalese causes immunodeficiency. Nagalese blocks production of GCMAF, thus preventing the immune system from doing its job. Without an active immune system, cancer and viral infections can grow unchecked’.
Bradstreet was using GcMAF (available globally as a commercially manufactured product for private consumption but outlawed by the FDA) in his treatment of young autistic patients, obtaining an astonishing 85% success rate. (The link to this claim is no longer available but was seen by the writer a little while after Bradstreet died.) This product was listed in the FDA search warrant of his premises, published online around the time of his death.
Bradstreet’s theory around nagalese and vaccines goes something like this (unfortunately, his own website article on this has been taken down): very elevated levels of nagalese are found in close to 80% of autism patients, but why? While both viruses and cancers cause these elevated levels, it’s not likely due to the presence of undetected cancers, which leaves viruses as the probable cause. In an article quoting Bradstreet, he writes,
‘Viruses make the nagalese enzyme as part of their attachment proteins. It serves to get the virus into the cell and also decreases the body’s immune reaction to the virus – thereby increasing the odds of viral survival’.
And: ‘It is reasonable and likely that the nature of the immune dysfunction and the frequently observed autoimmune problems in autism are mediated by persistent, unresolved viral infections.’
Has nagalese been added to vaccines, or is it a naturally occurring byproduct of the viruses that vaccines contain? Although this writer isn’t clear as to Dr. Bradstreet’s precise claim in this regard, Dr. Rima Laibow does assert that nagalese has been added: ‘[t]hey appear to have gone on to lace our vaccines with a substance with almost endless immune suppressant capacity so that they could the sell us drugs and chemotherapy agents when our immune systems failed us.’
What we can be sure of is that the viruses in vaccines automatically contain nagalese: ‘It is likely that vaccines contain nagalase – it is an intrinsic part of any virus, so regardless of whether the virus is live or attenuated it will have nagalase contained within.’
And this point is most important. If we check the CDC recommendations for childhood vaccines, it is alarming how their vaccine schedule has ramped up from 24 vaccines from birth to 18 years of age to a grand total of 71 for some diseases children are not even prone to, such as Hepatitis B. I urge you to check the link for this ‘before and after’ comparative chart. It is shocking.
It is clear that all children are being exposed to a cocktail of substances harmful to their developing immune systems. Think about the consumer aspect: fear is created around common diseases such as measles. Parents rush for a vaccine, which offers only temporary immunity if at all. (It has been shown that populations can still fall ill even after vaccination. See here and here.) The child will never be able to develop true lifelong immunity to the disease. Instead, a consumer of immune-system weakening vaccines has been successfully created for just one arguably non-critical disease.
‘One Size Does Not Fit All’
Of course, not all children will go on to develop autism nor will everyone develop cancer or some other autoimmune disease. But that is the point: the immune system of everyone is specific and will respond differentially. Recommending one type of immunization schedule for everyone will naturally backfire in some people. The one-size-fits-all approach to healthcare, typical of western medicine, simply does not work. According to Dr. Mercola:
But the fact is, vaccine risks are increased for some people because of biological and environmental differences.
As Fisher states, for some people the risks of vaccination are 100 percent, and when a vaccine reaction happens to you or someone you love, the logical response is to seek out why it happened so that it doesn’t happen again …
No matter where you stand in the vaccination debate, most would agree that in the case of medical care, one size does not fit all. What works for your child (or yourself) may not work for your neighbor’s but, when it comes to vaccines, they’re prescribed exactly the same for every child.
Today we know, however, that some children, like those with mitochondrial disorders, are at increased risk from vaccinations. Why, then, aren’t efforts being made to identify these children to prevent any unnecessary harm? An individual’s response to a vaccine is actually influenced by many factors.
For instance, an individual’s gut microbes may help determine their immune response to vaccines.
Autism and Vaccination Rates Rise In Tandem
Further, while correlation does not constitute causation, there is nonetheless a robust correlation between elevated vaccine schedules for children and an increase in the rate of autism. In her work on the toxicity of the adjuvant aluminum, Dr. Lucja Tomljenovic, a postdoctoral research fellow at the University of British Columbia, Department of Medicine, says [emphasis mine]:
“In the original study we gathered data that’s available from the US Department of Education about autism rates in the last couple of decades. We have done a similar analysis looking at autism rates in various other countries like UK and the Scandinavian countries.
We found that the countries that have the heaviest vaccines schedule (the children are vaccinated with a great number of vaccines) have higher autism rates compared to countries that do not vaccinate children with as many vaccines.
If you look at the temporal trend in the US, you see a significant correlation over the last three decades between the number of vaccines and autism rates. The autism numbers have been skyrocketing. They always say it’s only because the diagnosis of autism is better. But that’s a bogus argument because just in the last five years there’s been about a 70 percent increase in autism. This is not due to better diagnostic criteria, and it sure isn’t a genetic epidemic, because genes in a population do not change in a five-year span. These arguments are just silly,” she says.
At this point I remind the reader of the well-documented cover-up by the CDC of the link between autism and vaccines, especially concerning the effects of the MMR (measles – mumps – rubella) vaccine on black males under 3 years old. According to Dr. William Thompson, a senior CDC research scientist during this time:
“Oh my God, I did not believe that we did what we did, but we did. It’s all there… This is the lowest point in my career, that I went along with that paper. I have great shame now when I meet families of kids with autism, because I have been part of the problem.”“We’ve missed ten years of research because the CDC is so paralyzed right now by anything related to autism. They’re not doing what they should be doing because they’re afraid to look for things that might be associated.”
A retired lab researcher speaks out
Before leaving the subject of the dubious contents of vaccines, it is worth bearing in mind the experience of a researcher who used to make vaccines. In an anonymous interview given to Jon Rappoport in 2002, this retired vaccine researcher observed the following in terms of untested animal components added to vaccines [emphasis mine]:
Q. What contaminants did you find in your many years of work with vaccines?
A: All right. I’ll give you some of what I came across, and I’ll also give you what colleagues of mine found. Here’s a partial list. In the Rimavex measles vaccine, we found various chicken viruses. In polio vaccine, we found acanthamoeba, which is a so-called “brain-eating” amoeba. Simian cytomegalovirus in polio vaccine. Simian foamy virus in the rotavirus vaccine. Bird-cancer viruses in the MMR vaccine. Various micro-organisms in the anthrax vaccine. I’ve found potentially dangerous enzyme inhibitors in several vaccines. Duck, dog, and rabbit viruses in the rubella vaccine. Avian leucosis virus in the flu vaccine. Pestivirus in the MMR vaccine.
Q: Let me get this straight. These are all contaminants which don’t belong in the vaccines.
A: That’s right. And if you try to calculate what damage these contaminants can cause, well, we don’t really know, because no testing has been done, or very little testing. It’s a game of roulette. You take your chances. Also, most people don’t know that some polio vaccines, adenovirus vaccines, rubella and hep A and measles vaccines have been made with aborted human fetal tissue.
That’s right, ‘no testing has been done’. We’ll return to that point in part 2.
Our Right to Informed Consent
In closing, it is worth noting that even physicians who are not opposed to vaccines, such as the American Association of Physicians and Surgeons (AAPS), still firmly endorse the patient’s right to informed consent and believe that the practice of mandatory vaccines violates this. According to Dr. Colleen O’Leary:
The concept of informed consent stems from the fundamental ethical principle of the right of self determination. This principle recognizes that patients are autonomous, independent agents with the right to make decisions regarding their well-being without coercion from others.
Writes Rebecca Tyrell quoting the Executive Director of the AAPS [emphasis mine]:
Government-required vaccines amount to a gross violation of privacy rights and personal freedom, as well as abuse of the doctor-patient relationship. In a 1999 statement to the U.S. House Government Reform Committee, AAPS Executive Director Jane Orient, M.D., explained, “The relationship of patient and physician is shattered; in administering the vaccine, the physician is serving as the agent of the state.” In that role, a doctor is forced to violate the time-honored Hippocratic Oath whereby he swears to act in the best interests of his individual patient, a principle reflected in the AAPS motto: Omnia pro aegroto (“All for the patient”). “Instead, he is applying the new population-based ethic in which the interests of the individual patient may be sacrificed to the ‘needs of society.“
Orient stated that government-mandated vaccines mark a shocking reversal of traditional public health policy. In the past, authorities restricted individual liberty “only in case of a clear and present danger,” such as a quarantine of individuals infected with a dangerous communicable disease. “Today, a child may be deprived of his liberty to associate with others, or even of his supposed right to a public education, simply because of being unimmunized,” said Orient. It does not matter that he is uninfected or that he poses no “clear and present danger.” He is guilty until proven innocent — or in this case, until immunized.
Something on our medical landscape has clearly changed, paradigmatically so.
In Part 2, we’ll look at the constitutionality of vaccines and how the States are implementing federal guidelines. We’ll also look at what we can do about it.
About the author:
Pam Barker is a TLB staff writer/analyst. She has an extensive background in the educational system of several countries at the college and university level as a teacher and administrator.