So, was the GREAT 1918 FLU EPIDEMIC just vaccine damage?

So, here’s a very forthright piece. The reason to look at historical references, like the Faroes measles epidemic discussed in the previous two posts and, again, here, is to demonstrate that the oh-so-confident-attitudes demonstrated by todays medical industry about the nature of their vaccination product and about the Godlike status of Jenner, how this is not a new phenomenon!

The source here is Dr. Rebecca Carley, in the US, who I am attempting to obtain reference materials from to support the following writings. Yes, they sound very, very plausible, you’ve only to think, for example, of Gulf War syndrome…….however, as a dedicated and soul searching scientist, I seek referencing, cross correlations and any other relevant supporting evidences.

Anyways, as ever, I have remoulded the writing to enable it to be a bit more user friendly but not altered its content to any significant way. I even left a few paragraphs at the end which are, shall I say, speculative, at best, but, hey, I also believe in allowing a certain amount of free expression!

I will, of course, add extra information as I obtain it but, for now, please enjoy the following:

The 1918 Influenza Epidemic was a Vaccine Caused Disease

Very few people realize that the worst epidemic ever to hit America, the Spanish Influenza of 1918 was the after effect of the massive nation-wide vaccine campaign. The doctors told the people that the disease was caused by germs. Viruses were not known at that time or they would have been blamed. Germs, bacteria and viruses, along with bacilli and a few other invisible organisms are the scapegoats, which the doctors like to blame for the things they do not understand.

If the doctor makes a wrong diagnosis and treatment, and kills the patient, he can always blame it on the germs, and say the patient didn’t get an early diagnosis and come to him in time.

If we check back in history to that 1918 flu period, we will see that it suddenly struck just after the end of World War I when our soldiers were returning home from overseas. That was the first war in which all the known vaccines were forced on all the servicemen. This mish-mash of poison drugs and putrid protein of which the vaccines were composed, caused such widespread disease and death among the soldiers that it was the common talk of the day, that more of our men were being killed by medical shots than by enemy shots from guns.

Thousands were invalided home or to military hospitals, as hopeless wrecks, before they ever saw a day of battle. The death and disease rate among the vaccinated soldiers was four times higher than among the unvaccinated civilians. But this did not stop the vaccine promoters. Vaccine has always been big business, and so it was continued doggedly.

It was a shorter war than the vaccine-makers had planned on, only about a year for us, so the vaccine promoters had a lot of unused, spoiling vaccines left over which they wanted to sell at a good profit. So they did what they usually do, they called a meeting behind closed doors, and plotted the whole sordid program, a nationwide (worldwide) vaccination drive using all their vaccines, and telling the people that the soldiers were coming home with many dread diseases contracted in foreign countries and that it was the patriotic duty of every man, woman and child to get “protected” by rushing down to the vaccination centers and having all the shots.

Most people believe their doctors and government officials, and do what they say. The result was, that almost the entire population submitted to the shots without question, and it was only a matter of hours until people began dropping dead in agony, while many others collapsed with a disease of such virulence that no one had ever seen anything like it before.

They had all the characteristics of the diseases they had been vaccinated against, the high fever, chills, pain, cramps, diarrhea, etc. of typhoid, and the pneumonia like lung and throat congestion of diphtheria and the vomiting, headache, weakness and misery of hepatitis from the jungle fever shots, and the outbreak of sores on the skin from the smallpox shots, along with paralysis from all the shots, etc.

The doctors were baffled, and claimed they didn’t know what caused the strange and deadly disease, and they certainly had no cure. They should have known the underlying cause was the vaccinations, because the same thing happened to the soldiers after they had their shots at camp. The typhoid fever shots caused a worse form of the disease, which they called para-typhoid.

Then they tried to suppress the symptoms of that one with a stronger vaccine, which caused a still more serious disease, which killed and disabled a great many men. The combination of all the poison vaccines fermenting together in the body, caused such violent reactions that they could not cope with the situation.

Disaster ran rampant in the camps.

Some of the military hospitals were filled with nothing but paralyzed soldiers, and they were called war casualties, even before they left American soil. I talked to some of the survivors of that vaccine onslaught when they returned home after the war, and they told of the horrors, not of the war itself, and battles, but of the sickness at camp.

The doctors didn’t want this massive vaccine disease to reflect on them, so they, agreed among themselves to call it Spanish Influenza. Spain was a far away place and some of the soldiers had been there, so the idea of calling it Spanish Influenza seemed to be a good way to lay the blame on someone else.

The Spanish resented having us name the world scourge on them. They knew the flu didn’t originate in their country.

20,000,000 died of that flu epidemic, worldwide, and it seemed to be almost universal or as far away as the vaccinations reached. Greece and a few other countries, which did not accept the vaccines, were the only ones that were not hit by the flu. Doesn’t that prove something?

At home (in the U.S.) the situation was the same; the only ones who escaped the influenza were those who had refused the vaccinations. My family and 1 were among the few who persisted in refusing the high pressure sales propaganda, and none of us had the flu not even a sniffle, in spite of the fact that it was all around us, and in the bitter cold of winter.
Everyone seemed to have it. The whole town was down sick and dying. The hospitals were closed because the doctors and nurses were down with the flu. Everything was closed, schools, businesses, post office everything. No one was on the streets. It was like a ghost town. There were no doctors to care for the sick, so my parents went from house to house doing what they could to help the stricken in any way they could. T

hey spent all day and part of the night for weeks, in the sick rooms, and came home only to eat and sleep. If germs or viruses, bacteria, or any other little organisms were the cause of that disease, they had plenty of opportunity to latch onto my parents and “lay them low” with the disease that had prostrated the world. But germs were not the cause of that or any other disease, so they didn’t “catch” it.

I have talked to a few other people since that time, who said they escaped the 1918 flu, so I asked if they had the shots, and in every case, they said they had never believed in shots and had never had any of them. Common sense tells us that all those toxic vaccines all mixed up together in people, could not help but cause extreme body-poisoning and poisoning of some kind or another is usually the cause of disease.

Whenever a person coughs or sneezes, most people cringe, thinking that the germs are being spread around in the air and will attack people. There is no need to fear those germs any more, because that is not the way colds are developed.

Germs can’t live apart from the cells (host) and can’t do harm anyway, even if they wanted to. They have no teeth to bite anyone, no poison pouches like snakes, mosquitoes or bees, and do not multiply, except in decomposed substances, so they are helpless to harm. As stated before, their purpose is useful, not destructive.
The 1918 flu was the most devastating disease we ever had, and it brought forth all the medical bag of tricks to quell it, but those added drugs, all of which are poisons, only intensified the over-poisoned condition of the people, so the treatments actually killed more than the flu did.

From:
https://spktruth2power.wordpress.com/2009/07/11/the-1918-influenza-epidemic-was-a-vaccine-caused-disease/

Advertisements
Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

The early days of an industry – an 1846 perspective on Ye Vaccinations……..

“Aha, aha, quoth he – I know what to do”

“At present it might be hoped that such a calamity could be at least partially prevented by vaccination. It is obvious, however, that the physical character of the country renders it peculiarly difficult to carry this out satisfactorily. It could scarcely be done in any other way than for the physician to divide the islands into perhaps five districts, and to look after the vaccination in one of these each year, by turns, by making a double tour, so that he would manage to reach each village twice, with eight days’ interim, the first time to perform the vaccination, the second to learn the results.

“But it would be unreasonable to require such an inconvenience of the appointed physician without a corresponding remuneration, since, apart from other hardships, by such a long absence from Thorshavn as would be involved, he would lose a part of the income from practice to which the medical practitioner would be entitled.

 

“This much, at least, is clear – that vaccination such as is now performed on the Faroe Islands is entirely unreliable and futile. The fact is that a rustic is delegated to travel around the country to vaccinate the children. For this purpose, he is provided with vaccine and a needle or lancet, and is instructed how to go about the operation. This rustic then engages in each village a man, who can write, to inspect the children eight days after vaccination and to write to the provincial surgeon as to whether or not the vaccine has taken.

“However, since on the one hand, it is quite doubtful, in fact in many cases even improbable, that the man who is to inspect the children has ever seen a characteristic vaccine pustule, and, on the other hand, there is [the] question as to whether, to serve his neighbour or countryman, he is not capable of telling a slight falsehood, [as] the inhabitants are often loath to have their children vaccinated, because they fear the grafting in of foreign diseases, and so on. [endp19]

 

“If, then, a complete reform is to be effected on the Faroe Islands in regard to vaccination, as is certainly most desirable, especially [as] freer conditions of trade are to be expected, it will not only have to be undertaken by the physician himself, in double trips as suggested above, but it must also be carried out for all persons without exception, so that certificates of vaccination hitherto issued should excuse none from this slight operation.”

 

The early days in the development of the Global Scam. Young Doctor Ludvig Panum went to the Faroe islands, betwixt Iceland and Norway, in 1846, to tend to/examine and describe a measles outbreak in which, overall, 102 people or 1.31% of the 7782 population died. In the same period 153 people died of other causes.

 

The original manuscript is here: file:///U:/PanumFaroeIslands.pdf.

(Thanks to Gareth Hawker for introducing to me this fine book!)

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

That was a bit unfaroe…….

From Faroes Measles article by Dr Panum, 1846.

 On the vaccination issue wrt the Faroes measles epidemic (and noting there was no measles vaccine for around 120 years afterwards!)

At present it might be hoped that such a calamity could be at least partially prevented by vaccination. It is obvious, however, that the physical character of the country renders it peculiarly difficult to carry this out satisfactorily. It could scarcely be done in any other way than for the physician to divide the islands into perhaps five districts, and to look after the vaccination in one of these each year, by turns, by making a double tour, so that he would manage to reach each village twice, with eight days’ interim, the first time to perform the vaccination, the second to learn the results. But it would he unreasonable to require such an inconvenience of the appointed physician without a corresponding remuneration, since, apart from other hardships, by such a long absence from Thorshavn as would be involved, he would lose a part of the income from practice to which the medical practitioner would be entitled.

This much, at least, is clear; that vaccination such as is now performed on the Faroe Islands is entirely unreliable and futile. The fact is that a rustic is delegated to travel around the country to vaccinate the children; for this purpose, he is provided with vaccine and a needle or lancet, and is instructed how to go about the operation. This rustic then engages in each village a man, who can write, to inspect the children eight days after vaccination and to write to the provincial surgeon as to whether or not the vaccine has taken. However, since on the one hand, it is quite doubtful, in fact in many cases even improbable, that the man who is to inspect the children has ever seen a characteristic vaccine pustule, and, on the other hand, since there is a question as to whether to serve his neighbor or countryman he is not capable of telling a slight falsehood, seeing that the inhabitants are often loath to have their children vaccinated, because they fear the grafting in of foreign diseases, and so on, it may easily be perceived what is to he expected of such control.

If, then, a complete reform is to be effected on the Faroe Islands in regard to vaccination, as is certainly most desirable, especially if freer conditions of trade are to be expected, it will not only have to be undertaken by the physician himself, in double trips, as suggested above, but it must also be carried out for all persons without exception, so that certificates of vaccination hitherto issued should excuse none from this slight operation. Scarlatina (Scarlett Fever, I assume) has never, as far as I know, visited the Faroes, nor, probably, whooping cough, though the latter is recorded in 1838 in some of the church registers as a cause of death; For this information seems to have originated only from the fact that during the prevailing influenza epidemic, one or another priest mistook a violent catarrhal chest infection for whooping cough. Measles had not prevailed on the Faroes since 1781 then it broke out early in April 1846.

From: http://www.deltaomega.org/documents/PanumFaroeIslands.pdf

 

And, as I noted on “The Informed Parent” Facebook site:

Chris Hemmings OK, I’m going to be bogged down in the treasure trove that is the Faroes report, above, for some time! Initially, though, one has to observe that the population was in a very unhealthy state, chronically so. [As is very well documented in the Panum paper] Thus infections, when they arrived, knocked many out quickly. Same reason as measles still finishes off so many kids to this very day – in very poor, malnourished, clean water scarce, third world populations. Note, also, that even in such populations, the measles infection tends to only kill the very young – the final straw!

Why did the population stay in an unwell but soldiering on state for so long? I’d argue that they had plenty of local bacterial types with which there was conversation and to which the population as a whole was accustomed. What you could, indeed, call “herd immunity” if you had a wish to!

However, as there was no population based measles “colony”, there was no current familiarity with its characteristics.

Now, in a well fed, housed and engaged population, the reintroduction of such bacteriotypes should cause little duress – we all have, naturally, a fast response mechanism,  a detection, neutralisation and elimination system. In a chronically poor, malnourished, ill-housed and stressed population such responses are, understandably, severely compromised.

Hence the epidemic.

https://www.facebook.com/groups/226465094087290/permalink/1288721994528256/

 

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Stockholm Syndrome

OK, this is simply an extract and raw for future upgrading

Definition

Stockholm syndrome refers to a group of psychological symptoms that occur in some persons in a captive or hostage situation. It has received considerable media publicity in recent years because it has been used to explain the behaviour of such well known kidnapping victims as Patti Hearst (1974) and Elizabeth Smart (2002). The term takes its name from a bank robbery in Stockholm, Sweden, in August 1973. The robber took four employees from the bank (three women and one man) into the vault with him and kept them hostage for 131 hours.

After the employees were finally released they appeared to have formed a paradoxical emotional bond with their captor – they told reporters that they saw the police as their enemy, rather than the bank robber, and that they had positive feelings towards the criminal. The syndrome was first named by Nils Bejerot (1921-1988) a medical professor who specialised in addiction research and served as a psychiatric consultant during the standoff at the bank. Stockholm syndrome is known as Survival Identification Syndrome.

Description

Stockholm Syndrome is considered a complex reaction to a frightening situation, and experts do not agree completely on all its characteristic features or on the factors that make someone more susceptible  than others to developing it. One reason for the disagreement is that it would be unethical to test theories about the syndrome by experimenting on human beings.The data for understanding the syndrome are derived from actual hostage situations since 1973 that differ considerably from one another in terms of location, number of people involved and time frame.

Another source of disagreement concerns the extent to which the syndrome can be used  to explain other historical phenomena or more commonplace types of abusive relationships. Many researchers believe the Stockholm Syndrome helps to explain certain behaviours of survivors of WW2 concentration camps, members of religious cults, battered wives, incest survivors, and physically or emotionally abused children as well as people taken hostage by criminals or terrorists.

Most experts agree, however, that Stockholm Syndrome has three central characteristics.

  1. The hostages have negative feelings about the police or other authorities
  2. The hostages have positive feelings towards their captor(s).
  3. The captors develop positive feelings towards their hostage(s).

 

Causes and symptoms

Stockholm syndrome does not affect all hostages (or persons in comparable situations); in fact, a Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) study of over 1200 hostage-taking incidents found that 92% of the hostages did not develop Stockholm syndrome. FBI researchers then interviewed flight attendants who had been taken hostage during airplane hijackings, and concluded that three factors are necessary for the syndrome to develop:

  • The crisis situation lasts for several days or longer.
  • The hostage takers remain in contact with the hostages; that is, the hostages are not placed in a separate room.
  • The hostage takers show some kindness toward the hostages or at least refrain from harming them. Hostagesabused by captors typically feel anger toward them and do not usually develop the syndrome.

In addition, people who often feel helpless in other stressful life situations or are willing to do anything in order to surviveseem to be more susceptible to developing Stockholm syndrome if they are taken hostage.

People with Stockholm syndrome report the same symptoms as those diagnosed with posttraumatic stress disorder(PTSD): insomnia, nightmares, general irritability, difficulty concentrating, being easily startled, feelings of unreality orconfusion, inability to enjoy previously pleasurable experiences, increased distrust of others, and flashbacks.

Diagnosis

Stockholm syndrome is a descriptive term for a pattern of coping with a traumatic situation rather than a diagnosticcategory. Most psychiatrists would use the diagnostic criteria for acute stress disorder or posttraumatic stress disorderwhen evaluating a person with Stockholm syndrome.

Treatment

Treatment of Stockholm syndrome is the same as for PTSD, most commonly a combination of medications for short-term sleep disturbances and psychotherapy for the longer-term symptoms.

Key terms

Coping — In psychology, a term that refers to a person’s patterns of response to stress. Some patterns of coping maylower a person’s risk of developing Stockholm syndrome in a hostage situation.

Flashback —

The remergence of a traumatic memory as a vivid recollection of sounds, images, and sensationsassociated with the trauma. The person having the flashback typically feels as if they are reliving the event. Flashbackswere first described by doctors treating combat veterans of World War I (1914–1918).

Identification with an aggressor — In psychology, an unconscious process in which a person adopts the perspectiveor behavior patterns of a captor or abuser. Some researchers consider it a partial explanation of Stockholm syndrome.

Regression — In psychology, a return to earlier, usually childish or infantile, patterns of thought or behavior.

Syndrome — A set of symptoms that occur together.

Prognosis

The prognosis for recovery from Stockholm syndrome is generally good, but the length of treatment needed depends onseveral variables. These include the nature of the hostage situation; the length of time the crisis lasted, and theindividual patient’s general coping style and previous experience(s) of trauma.

Prevention

Prevention of Stockholm syndrome at the level of the larger society includes further development of crisis interventionskills on the part of law enforcement as well as strategies to prevent kidnapping or hostage-taking incidents in the firstplace. Prevention at the individual level is difficult as of the early 2000s because researchers have not been able toidentify all the factors that may place some persons at greater risk than others; in addition, they disagree on the specificpsychological mechanisms involved in Stockholm syndrome. Some regard the syndrome as a form of regression (returnto childish patterns of thought or action) while others explain it in terms of emotional paralysis (“frozen fright”) oridentification with the aggressor.

Resources

Books

American Psychiatric Association. Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, 4th edition, text revision.Washington, DC: American Psychiatric Association, 2000.

Graham, Dee L. R., with Edna I. Rawlings and Roberta K. Rigsby. Loving to Survive, Chapter 1, “Love Thine Enemy:Hostages and Classic Stockholm Syndrome.” New York and London: New York University Press, 1994.

Herman, Judith, MD. Trauma and Recovery, 2nd ed., revised. New York: Basic Books, 1997. Chapter 4, “Captivity,” isparticularly helpful in understanding Stockholm syndrome.

Periodicals

Bejerot, Nils. “The Six-Day War in Stockholm.” New Scientist 61 (1974): 486-487.

Fuselier, G. Dwayne, PhD. “Placing the Stockholm Syndrome in Perspective.” FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin (July1999): 23-26.

Grady, Denise. “Experts Look to Stockholm Syndrome on Why Girl Stayed.” International Herald Tribune, 17 March2003. A newspaper article about the Elizabeth Smart kidnapping case.

 

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Herd it all before, now hear it again from Andy (and me – I’ll not let such an opportunity go by without my input, too!)

In an Informed Parent discussion somebody put up Andy’s piece, below, on herd immunity, that much loved and wholly misused term in the armory of such luminaries of the Vaccinologista in their Voodoo temples as Paul Offit and Ben goldacre. This is the discussion whence it came, followed by the article itself [with me butting in thushow]:
https://www.facebook.com/groups/226465094087290/permalink/1288721994528256/?hc_location=ufi

Notes on Herd Immunity from Andrew Wakefield

“Herd Immunity is a term that is bandied around in defence of mass and mandatory vaccination. What is it and why is it important?
Let’s set out a working definition of what Herd Immunity is at a functional level in the population: Herd Immunity is the presence of adequate immunity within a population against a specific infection that operates to protect those at high risk of serious infection and consequently, reduce morbidity and mortality from that infection.

[I reckon this is a medics slant and for a real understanding we have to use an ecological definition, whereby familiarity of endemic bacterial populations within the group of animals, and the young in particular, is constantly topped up by interpersonal contacts – such as the mother suckling her young.]
Now let’s separate out Herd Immunity, comparing what it meant in the pre-vaccine era compared with what it means in the vaccine era, using specific infections as examples.
Measles: Herd Immunity in the pre-vaccine era

  • When measles first enters a population that has not been exposed to measles before, Herd Immunity is zero and there is, initially, a very high morbidity (illness) and mortality.

[I would strongly demur at this, too. We have no information of such events ever having happened. Yes, conjectures about, for example, plague in Europe or Aztec ague in early, post Spanish invasion Mexico, can be countered by a range of nutritional, lifestyle and, indeed, happiness criteria. (The Aztec CANNOT  have been happy at all!]

  • This occurs in large part as a consequence of high dose exposure. [?]
    • High dose exposure occurs because, in the absence of viral immunity, viral replication is unimpeded in the multiple susceptible human reservoirs in which it thrives. High doses of measles virus are transmitted from one person to the next. [???]

Added to this, socioeconomic circumstances contribute to high dose exposure. This includes high population density (easy transmission) and poor antiviral defences (e.g. low vitamins A, D, and C). An example is the ravage of measles in Confederate soldiers amassed in barracks and hospitals in the American Civil War. [Yeah, back to standard reasons for infectious success here!]

  • Over time, as measles becomes endemic (constantly circulating) in a population with typical 2-yearly epidemics, Herd Immunity increases rapidly. Natural exposure leads to long term immunity. Immunity limits viral transmission [Means there is none……] and opportunities for viral replication. Concomitantly, developed countries have experienced an improvement in nutritional status and consequently antiviral immunity. Dose of exposure falls and a dramatic reduction in morbidity and mortality is observed.
  • As a consequence of natural Herd Immunity, in the developed world measles mortality had fallen by 99.6% before measles vaccines were introduced. [Nothing to do with “Herd Immunity” – simply a far more healthy population] A fall in morbidity will have paralleled the fall in mortality (mortality is the extreme of morbidity).

Let us look at an example of how natural Herd Immunity operated to provide age-appropriate immunity.

  • Infants less than one year of age have a limited ability to generate adequate immunity and are susceptible to serious measles infection.
  • In the pre-vaccine era mothers conferred good passive immunity on their infants by transplacental [Well, maybe……] and breast milk transfer. [Most certainly.]
  • This passive immunity protected infants through a period of vulnerability until they were better able to cope with measles through the generation of their own active immunity.

The vaccine era
Measles vaccine has destroyed natural Herd Immunity and replaced it with a temporary and inadequate quasi Herd Immunity that necessitates a dependence on vaccination along with an increased risk of severe adverse outcomes. Here are some examples of how natural Herd Immunity has been destroyed.

  • The increasing Herd Immunity associated with natural measles and the accompanying decrease in morbidity and mortality, has been interrupted by vaccination. This makes it difficult to predict how vaccinated populations might respond to, say, a new strain of measles virus that has escaped the ‘protection’ conferred by measles vaccine (escape mutant). Because that population is not immune to the escape mutant we risk high morbidity and mortality from measles once again.
  • Vaccinated mothers do not confer adequate passive immunity upon their infants (< 1 year of age). Infants are unable to generate an adequate immune response to measles vaccine and in the absence of passive maternal immunity, are unprotected during the first year, putting them at risk of serious measles infection. [This has long seemed to me to be a seriously crucial situation. As does the Czeck Canadian.]
  • Unlike natural measles, measles vaccine does not provide lasting immunity and a substantial proportion of measles cases are reported in those who have been vaccinated against measles. [Indeed!]
  • Boosting of immunity using repeated doses of measles vaccine is not sustained and falls off rapidly. The only answer to this diminishing return that is offered by the regulators and manufacturers is to give more and more vaccines. The vaccine is highly profitable in terms of volume of sales, precisely because it is inadequately effective. [And what does any blood titre of immunoglobin actually demonstrate, eh?]

Mumps and Herd Immunity
Mumps is acknowledged to be a trivial disease in children

 [Ask my two whether they found it trivial – it was awful, as far as I could tell! But it was all over in two weeks]

; many do not even know they have had mumps the symptoms are so mild. Mumps is not a trivial disease in post-pubertal males where it can cause testicular inflammation and sterility.
Mumps vaccine does not work. Protection is way below the 96% claimed by Merck and mumps epidemics are occurring worldwide in highly vaccinated populations. Merck is accused of fraudulently misrepresenting the efficacy of their mumps vaccine in order to protect their US monopoly on the MMR vaccine. I would suggest that everyone who has suffered mumps and particularly its complications despite mumps vaccination, has a valid legal claim against Merck.
Mumps vaccine failure is associated with inadequate immunity following vaccination (primary failure) and rapidly waning immunity after vaccination (secondary failure). These factors mean that populations are at greater risk as they grow older. Since severe side effects are more common in mature males, mumps vaccine has made mumps a more dangerous disease.
Natural Herd Immunity, that is, lifelong immunity following exposure of children to mumps in the pre-vaccine era, has been destroyed by mumps vaccination.

[And where do the new outbreaks come from? There was the great 2003 outbreak in all the primary schools of North West Wales (at least NWW – I have not heard about adjacent or other regions of the country for that year). In Ysgol Carmel School the outbreak arose within the vaccinated kids – post at least one dose of MMR. Two of my three kids in the school caught Mumps, the third and youngest, did not. At all. Or ever since – she is now 20. So, whence came these mumps viruses?]
Chickenpox and Herd Immunity
The chickenpox virus (varicella zoster) causes a mild self-limiting disease in healthy children. The virus frequently establishes latent infection in the cell bodies of sensory nerve roots where it has the potential to episodically reactivate and cause shingles, a very painful and debilitating condition. Shingles can cause blindness. Historically, shingles was an uncommon disease occurring in, for example, people with immune deficiency due to cancer or immunosuppressive drug therapy.
Reactivation of zoster is inhibited by an adequate level of immunity to this virus which, in turn, is maintained by boosting of immunity in parents and grandparents by re-exposure via children with chickenpox. Natural epidemics of chickenpox maintained Herd Immunity by ‘wild-type boosting’ (referring to the natural virus) of adults which prevented shingles in otherwise healthy individuals. [Think this is speculative, Andy…..] This is no longer the case.
Widespread chickenpox vaccination has removed natural Herd Immunity by preventing epidemics, eliminating ‘wild-type’ boosting, and allowing immunity to fall in individuals to the point where shingles is now much more common, occurring in young, apparently healthy people. Vaccination has created a new epidemic to which Merck’s response is, ‘we’ve created a market; now let’s make a vaccine to prevent shingles.’ [Quite!]
-Andrew Wakefield

Thanks all. We have to develop a very clear set of common responses to the nefarious concepts offered up by the establishment of Voodoo rationalisers. I am not being pedantic as I seek to clarify the points made in Andy’s origninal piece. Au contraire, I am seeking to thrash out an absolute and purely objective truth. Hmm, yeah, TRUTH if one is allowed to use such a concept in today’s murky international conversation………..

-Chris Hemmings

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Oh dear: “Inoculate vaccination commission from fake science”.

This is my minimalist approach, as I only want to illustrate a single, particular detail here – so bare with me!

We have the new US President proposing to appoint a Kennedy to chair a Commission into the collateral damage from vaccines. Well, he is clearly a maverick, a libertarian and one who has personally witnessed these problems so, to President Trump this needs sorting.

Which triggers the rearguard action, the institutional defence and as much heavy artillery as they can muster. Here is an article which typifies such – written in snooty, weknowbest professionalist manner and saying practically nothing other than to repeat many meaningless Offitisms.

However, after scanning/skimming through the article as writ, then look through the authors’ biogs, at the end of the piece. Ouch, another example of one who is so deeply in denial that he will not see the truth about his own kids……..

Article in “The Hill”, By Dr Ashley Darcy-Mahony and Dr Kevin Pelphrey – 01/30/17

After years of pushing back against scientifically discredited claims that vaccinations cause autism, health professionals and researchers are seeing results: vaccination rates are finally back on the rise in the U.S.

Yet just recently, a guest column by Dr. Daniel Neides, Chief Operating Officer of the prestigious Cleveland Clinic’s Wellness Institute and Robert Kennedy Jr.’s claim that then President-elect Donald Trump asked him to “chair a commission on vaccination safety and scientific integrity” have once again put the anti-vaccination cause back in the spotlight. President Trump’s team has since disavowed Mr. Kennedy’s claim concerning his selection to lead the committee.

These developments have the potential to derail longtime efforts to mitigate the negative effects of news around vaccines and autism. Despite the numerous, extensive and reproducible tests that prove that vaccinations do not cause autism, some public figures continue to feed conspiracy theories about vaccine safety. Using taxpayer dollars for an inquiry that may perpetuate harmful doubts, spread misinformation and possibly even lead to new immunization policies that are unsupported by science could have grave consequences for American families.

Nevertheless, if there is to be such a commission, health care experts and scientists have a responsibility to fully participate. This is the only way to ensure that the commission’s conclusions are not one-sided, but rather the result of a rigorous and open discussion that addresses the concerns of parents, eliminates myths and creates broad consensus on how to protect our nation’s children from devastating infectious diseases.

As researchers, nurses and doctors, the proliferation of discredited theories only makes our job harder and creates dangerous – and unnecessary – hurdles for safeguarding the nation’s public health. In fact, we have already seen the price we all pay for not vaccinating children, with recent outbreaks of measles, mumps and whooping cough across the US all directly related to parents’ refusals to vaccinate.

Because of such alarming stakes, we clearly recognize that we must do more to reassure and educate families while forcefully rebutting unsubstantiated claims. A full and definitive airing of all the scientific evidence by such a commission may present an opportunity to do so. If this presidential commission comes to fruition, these are the issues that should be addressed and settled once and for all:

  • First, the committee should weigh all the possible risks associated with the spacing of vaccinations. This means evaluating the CDCand AAPschedules as well as determining the harm that could be done if we space out or delay the vaccination schedule of children, thereby exposing vulnerable children to potential infection for an unnecessarily longer period of time.
  • Second, the commission should reinforce efforts by the National Institutes of Health to further increase scientific rigor and transparency in research. By leading efforts to verify that study conclusions are truly independent and not compromised by financial incentives, we can reassure families that, regardless of the source, the science is solid.

We must also acknowledge that there is clearly a need to address some outstanding myths that keep the discredited anti-vaccine movement alive within our society. Researchers, doctors, nurses and other experts must stand prepared to be a part of this committee, and we call upon our colleagues to join us in demanding that scientific experts have a seat at the table. Now is the time to fully assume our civic duties. Public health should not be a partisan issue.

As pediatric researchers, our job is to advocate for our patients and we understand that all parents ultimately just want the best for their kids. Making major decisions about a child’s health is a profound challenge – especially when you are unsure of whom to trust or what is simply true or false. If we can address outstanding questions and finally convince skeptical parents that the best way to truly protect their children is to vaccinate them, we will have performed a real public service.

Ashley Darcy-Mahoney is an assistant professor and neonatal nurse practitioner at the George Washington University School of Nursing and the director of infant research at GW’s Autism and Neurodevelopmental Disorders Institute. Dr. Darcy-Mahoney’s research has led to the creation of programs that improve health and developmental outcomes for at-risk and preterm infants. 

Kevin Pelphrey is a neuroscientist who serves as the Carbonell Family Professor and Director of the Autism and Neurodevelopmental Disorders Institute at the George Washington University and as a public member of the United States Government’s Interagency Autism Coordinating Committee. Dr. Pelphrey is also the father of a son and a daughter with autism. His research has identified the brain basis of autism spectrum disorders and created new tools for improving evidence-based autism treatments.

Posted in Big Med, Big Pharm, Offit, Vaccine damage denialism | 1 Comment

Complete index of titles todate

 

Here’s a complete list of all the posts on this blog up to date. Just control/click to get there (except 26, 27 and 29…..):

[It is worth noting that most of these pieces are largely unedited since they were posted and so will contain many subsequently corrected typos and just writing I subsequently deemed to be poor, irrelevant, or perhaps a mite too controversial! ]

1 – The Elephant in this Jungle

2 – Semantic systems biology meets evidence based medicine – a parable.

3 – Ghenghis Clohn

4 – Battlefield Blues

5 – Genetics subverted – by its establishment

6 – Scandals in the works – BSEM meeting, London, Feb2011.

7 – The natural history of infection

8 – Beware Psociety’s Determinista

9 – Just because.

10 – How’s this for Dogmatism?

11 – Uta Frith

12 – Am I a bioterrorist?

13 – Sin-thetic Biology

14 – Why are socialists so in awe of science?

15 – On patents and India

16 – Deepest Congolese Disease

17 – Putting Mars through some Wiking – another Saga.

18 – “Wheat Belly” brings me Full Circle – and the Missing Puzzle Piece

19 – Munchausen Syndrome rebranded. (The “Winscale, oh, sorry, I mean Sellafield” effect.)”

20 – Sieving Acres of Gold?

21 – Weinstein’s Question

22 – It really makes me sick

23 – The Curious Case of Panorama’s Blind Reportage – SSPE, MMR and the limitations of Sarah

24 – One Flu over the Cockoo’s Nest

25 – Missing puzzle pieces?

26 – Medicine Men

27 – What is “Evidence based” information?

28 – I didn’t know this but……..

29 – If Andy Wakefield were a bond trader…..

30 – The Annul Hypothesis

31 – Institute to Investigate the Damaging Physiological Outcomes of Vaccination, IDPOV

32 – One Gene to Rule Them All and in the Darkness Bind Them

33 – So? Annul the Institutionalised Bias!

34 – A Very High Potentiation?

35 – When is an antigen not an antigen? Answer: when it’s an adjuvant!

36 – Andy, this is very difficult for me to write…..

37 – Viral passports?

38 – Aaronovitch – the man who wants to bolt the gates shut on everyone

39 – Wilby, won’t he?

40 – Haw Haw – Psychological Warfare

41 – Is this the White Flag?

42 – John “Turncoat” Humphreys and a little Tees

43 – Jennerism – keeping the 21st century back in the 18th

44 – So how do we contract Typhoid? Enteric bacterial sagas and those cash rich vaccinators

45 – Professor Mark Kendall – I wonder if he’ll get this one to stick?

46 – The Leninist-Stalinist perspective or Animal Farm revisited

47 – Of course there always was an alternative to Vaccination via Needle

48 – The Technician

49 – The Voodoo of Vaccination

50 – I know WHO not to believe

51 – More than my jobsworth, part three

52 – Herd all the noise and the accusations?

53 – The Nature of Institutional Thinking (Sinking…fast?)

54 – I’ll Huff and I’ll Puff and I’ll lie like the best of ‘em -ington Post

55 – Of a Finn, flu jabs and corruption – same ole story, really!

56 – On infant dosed antibiotics and childhood obesity – setting the scene for the adult obesity plague?

58 – On Vitamin C

59 – The Jab Patrol? Tightening the Grip?

60 – Immunobiology – superb science built upon a totally flawed assumption. Part One – I have a dream.

61 – Immunobiology – superb science built upon a totally flawed assumption. Part Two – Jenner in every pore.

62 – Immunobiology – superb science built upon a totally flawed assumption. Part Four – Methinks they do protest too much

63 – Immunobiology – superb science built upon a totally flawed assumption. Part Four – Methinks they do protest too much

64 – Immunobiology – superb science built upon a totally flawed assumption. Part Five – Towards a Bio-Medical Ecology

65 – Bad Science. Very Bad Science.

66 – Compare and contrast Vaccines and Antibiotics – for good or evil!

67 – A proposed mechanism for the acquisition of high levels of allergy in modern human society.

68 – Sometimes you just gotta laugh……….

69 – Nadine’s Cri de Coeur

70 – When did high tech science get grafted into the Vaccine Voodoo?

71 – “So, it’s like a great big conspiracy, is it?”

72 – Jenner’s application for funding from the MRC and the Pearly Gates’ Foundation.

73 – A short note on 2015 Flu provision – note my phrasing!

74 – Wheat Belly Up

75 – The Voodoo Ponzi Scheme.

76 – Akin to a bottle of whisky for an alcoholic the Government’s Joint Committee on Vaccination and Immunisation (JCVI) and – NHS resolve to give annual flu jabs to all the obese in the UK.

77 – Meningitis B a dead cert Money Maker

78 – Vive la révolution!

79 – Another convert from the medical profession

80 – Patches – we’re dependin’ on you………

81 – Ebola? Not here!

82 – Now hold on a moment

83 – Distemper bad temper……….

84 – Conclusion to book – no really, I am going to stop and publish it now. Just you watch…..

85 – Type 2 Coeliac Disease

86 – The biomedical ecology of three sugars – sucrose, glucose and fructose.

87 – Confessions

88 – A modern voodoo?

89 – Dancing Cats, Silent Canaries

90 – The Artefactual Life of Antibodies

 

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment