Creating Waves of Awareness
The Detroit News | Measles surges in U.K. years after flawed vaccine research
Immunization drives ramp up. London — More than a decade ago, British parents refused to give measles shots to at least a million children because of now discredited research that linked the vaccine to autism. Now, health officials are scrambling to catch up and stop a growing epidemic of the contagious disease.
This year, the U.K. has had more than 1,200 cases of measles, after a record number of nearly 2,000 cases last year. The country once recorded only several dozen cases every year. It now ranks second in Europe, behind only Romania. . . .
The majority of those getting sick in the U.K. — including a significant number of older children and teens — had never been vaccinated. Almost 20 of the more than 100 seriously ill children have been hospitalized and 15 have suffered complications including pneumonia and meningitis. One adult with measles has died, though it's unclear if it was the disease that killed him.
The Sound of Liberty | How to say 'No' to vaccines? Crusador Interviews Book Author & Acclaimed International Vaccine Expert Dr. Sherri Tenpenny
Millions of Americans have come to distrust vaccines and mainstream medicine’s vaccine agenda. There is a growing movement in this country and around the world that questions the safety and effectiveness of all vaccines for obvious reasons. Many childhood disorders such as autism, ADD/ADHD, SIDS and others have been linked to vaccines. Thousands of soldiers who served in the military have been severely disabled or in some cases even died after receiving their mandated shots. Vaccines are the most controversial subject in all of medicine.
The standard line heard from most parents once their eyes are open to the risks of vaccines is, “How will I get my child into day care or in school without their shots.” Those working in the healthcare field or soldiers in the military are faced with similar questions.
Whooping Cough News May 20, 2013 | A newer version of the whooping cough vaccine doesn't protect kids as well as the original, which was phased out in the 1990s because of safety concerns, according to a new study.
During a 2010-2011 outbreak of whooping cough in California, researchers found that youth who had been vaccinated with the newer, so called acellular vaccine were six times more likely to catch whooping cough than those who had received a series of the older whole-cell vaccine.
New York Court Case | A judge denied a request by a devout Catholic mom on Staten Island for an injunction that would allow her daughter to return to school while the family’s lawsuit against the city over vaccines is heard.
Dina Check, of West Brighton, is suing to force the city to let her 5-year-old daughter into class even though the child hasn’t had her shots.
Check, who says she is against vaccination on religious grounds, asked the court to let the girl back into PS 35 while the case winds its way through court.
A Brooklyn federal judge denied the request, ruling that Check’s argument that she doesn’t want her daughter vaccinated for religious reasons is not persuasive.
Vaccination is Not Equivalent to Immunity | Alternative Medicine with Peter Lind | WASHINGTON, April 30, 2013 - Immunity is enhancing the immune system. The seat of immunity is primarily found in the gastrointestinal system. Mast cells are the major sensory input of the innate immune system. These cells are on the lookout for foreign invaders. Also, they help regulate acute inflammation from the beginning to end. Once the mast cell detects a pathogen or foreign intruder, it releases special chemicals, cytokines, that attack the intruders and then circulate in the body to recruit other cells of the immune system. This overarching regulatory control over innate immune processes has made mast cells successful targets to purposefully enhance or, alternatively, suppress mast cell responses in multiple therapeutic contexts. J Immunol. 2013 May 1;190(9):4458-63. doi: 10.4049/jimmunol.1203420
In spite of the evidence disputing the benefits of the flu vaccines hospitals, schools and state legislators around the nation have been implementing flu vaccine mandates for employees, under threat of termination. This includes everyone working for the hospital, whether they have patient contact or not. This is only the tip of the iceberg. The CDC plans to revaccinate all children and adults; hospital workers just have the misfortune of being at the top of the list.
NEWSMAX HEALTH May 16, 2013 | John Hopkins PhD Slams the Influenza Vaccine As Ineffective and Potentially Harmful | "The vaccine may be less beneficial and less safe than has been claimed, and the threat of influenza seems to be overstated," Doshi says. Mandatory vaccination polices have been enacted, often in healthcare facilities, forcing some people to take the vaccine under threat of losing their jobs.
(02/10/2012) report to the panel discussion
With the background of the so-called swine flu and the H1N1 pandemic, which was not then, it has become a high-level panel discussion on 6 September busy at the Charité. Guest was Dr Peter Doshi from Johns Hopkins University in Baltimore (USA), who has carefully studied as an employee of the Cochrane Collaboration, the decision chain that led to the declaration of a pandemic and the ensuing global use of Tamiflu. Doshi discussed together with Professor Gerd Antes (German Cochrane Centre in Freiburg), Dr. Günther Jonitz (President of the Berlin Chamber of Physicians), Dr. Wolfgang Wodarg (Transparency International Deuschland) and moderator Dr. Peter Tinnemann (Charité). Attended the event of an illustrious audience, including the former president of the Paul Ehrlich Institute, Dr. Johannes Loewer, the Munich medical journalist Werner Bartensleben and a representative of the Federal Institute for Drugs and Medical Devices (BfArM), the Tamiflu for approval in Germany had come under criticism.
Peter Doshi it did at the beginning of his lecture to the point: The swine flu illness cases in 2009 were not a pandemic. This made Doshi clear from the numbers of influenza pandemics of the last century and the deaths resulted from them. Following the U.S. scientists showed how it could still come to the declaration of a pandemic by the WHO. The positive assessment of Tamiflu is therefore mainly due to a work from 2003 in which a research team led by Laurent Kaiser, who now conducts research in Geneva, had analyzed ten clinical trials. Result: The Tamiflu sink in influenza patients the likelihood of hospitalization by over 50 percent. How the Cochrane Colloboration found out four of the six authors of the Kaiser paper, however, were in the service of the pharmaceutical company Roche. Eight of the ten studies reviewed were also never released. Several calls to Roche, to make the data available were not followed to this day. Praised by the manufacturer at the positive effect of Tamiflu in terms of duration and severity of H1N1 infection, therefore there is now massive doubts.Nevertheless, governments around the world bought a million times the mean. For Roche, a billion dollar business.
For Wolfgang Wodarg this was clearly a "fake pandemic". His view was not optimistic: The global health system will shape the financial system, or dramatic terms: doctors would often purchased to provide study results in terms of the pharmaceutical industry. The other panelists saw this problem as well, but were less culturally pessimistic. Chamber President Jonitz explained the dilemma in which many physicians stuck: Namely to be biased by their profession of it, wanting to dosomething, but at the same time to be partially rooted in the belief in authority. "But the skepticism is rising," he is convinced. An evidence-based information as a basis for rational decisions can not come over, anyway. But the decisive point: "We have to get better access to data," said Jonitz. This is also the mission of Gerd Antes, who has made the German Cochrane Centre mission is to deliver "clean knowledge". Unfortunately this does not always come on at the doctors. So then turned the discussion to the two central questions: How do you get the necessary evidence-based information? And how come then to the doctor? The round it certainly could not provide final answers, but put in many points the finger in the wound - which is already a lot of this complex topic.
Alert: What Is Your Risk for a Heart Attack? Find Out Now
According to the FDA:
“Aluminum may reach toxic levels with prolonged parenteral administration [this means injected into the body] if kidney function is impaired. Research indicates that patients with impaired kidney function, including premature neonates [babies], who received parenteral levels of aluminum at greater than 4 to 5 micrograms per kilogram of body weight per day, accumulate aluminum at levels associated with central nervous system and bone toxicity [for a tiny newborn, this toxic dose would be 10 to 20 micrograms, and for an adult it would be about 350 micrograms]. Tissue loading may occur at even lower rates of administration.” [Department of Health and Human Services, Food and Drug Administration, Document NDA 19-626/S-019, Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act for Dextrose Injections.]
”Aluminum content in parenteral drug products could result in a toxic accumulation of aluminum in individuals receiving TPN therapy. Research indicates that neonates [newborns] and patient populations with impaired kidney function may be at high risk of exposure to unsafe amounts of aluminum. Studies show that aluminum may accumulate in the bone, urine, and plasma of infants receiving TPN. Many drug products used in parenteral therapy [injections] may contain levels of aluminum sufficiently high to cause clinical manifestations [symptoms] parenteral aluminum bypasses the protective mechanism of the GI tract and aluminum circulates and is deposited in human tissues. Aluminum toxicity is difficult to identify in infants because few reliable techniques are available to evaluate bone metabolism in infants Although aluminum toxicity is not commonly detected clinically, it can be serious in selected patient populations, such as neonates [newborns], and may be more common than is recognized.” [Department of Health and Human Services, Food and Drug Administration, Document 02N-0496, Aluminum in Large and Small Volume Parenterals Used in Total Parenteral Nutrition. Available online at: http://www.fda.gov/ohrms/dockets/98fr/oc0367.pdf
So basically from those documents we learn that if a premature baby receives more than 10 mcg of aluminum in an IV, it can accumulate in their bones and brain, and can be toxic.
The FDA maximum requirements for aluminum received in an IV is 25 mcg per day. The suggested aluminum per kg of weight to give to a person is up to 5mcg. (so a 5 pounds baby should get no more than 11mcg of aluminum.) Anything that has more than 25 mcg of aluminum is *supposed* to have a label that says:
WARNING: This product contains aluminum that may be toxic. Aluminum may reach toxic levels with prolonged parenteral administration if kidney function is impaired. Premature neonates are particularly at risk because their kidneys are immature, and they require large amounts of calcium and phosphate solutions, which contain aluminum.
Research indicates that patients with impaired kidney function, including premature neonates, who receive parenteral levels of aluminum at greater than 4 to 5 [micro]g/kg/day, accumulate aluminum at levels associated with central nervous system and bone toxicity. Tissue loading may occur at even lower rates of administration. http://www.accessdata.fda.gov/scripts/cdrh/cfdocs/cfcfr/CFRSearch.cfm
>>> Vaccines, for some reason, are not required to have this label and also are not required to follow the maximum dosage of 25 mcg. br/>
Read more here: http://vaxtruth.org/2011/08/vaccine-ingredients/
The High Court has ruled that a 5-year-old boy will have to get his 4-in-1 and MMR booster vaccination shots — even though his mother does not want him to.
The parents of the schoolboy, who are no longer in a relationship, had gone to court in a row over whether their child should have his MMR and 4-in-1 booster vaccination shots.
Mr Justice Michael Moriarty heard evidence from the mother of the child, who does not want her son to have the booster jabs, and the father, who wanted the injections to be given as speedily as possible.
In ruling, the judge said no legal authorities existed to assist in cases where estranged parents differed on medical treatment for their child, and he did not accept that the mother as primary carer had the stronger voice than the father.
A stay of 28 days was put on the order in case the mother wants to bring an appeal to the Supreme Court.
The child’s mother wanted the High Court to quash a decision of the circuit court last year that the boy be given the vaccinations under the HSE school immunisation scheme.
The district court and circuit court have already ruled that the inoculations should proceed, in accordance with the father’s wishes.
When the child was born he was immunised without dispute and no adverse reactions were reported after any of the shots. The parents’ relationship later broke down and the mother left the family home with her son.
Last year, the child was due to receive the injections provided for under the HSE programme to children in junior infants, but a dispute arose between the parents on the issue.
Yesterday, Mr Justice Moriarty ruled the HSE in the boy’s locality be notified of the court’s decision but he allowed a 28-day stay on the operation of the order, where no innoculations can take place in case there is an appeal to the Supreme Court.
The judge said the mother and father were clearly loving parents and it was unfortunate the deterioration in their relationship had extended to disagreements over whether their son ought to be vaccinated.
Mr Justice Moriarty said he did not accept that a hierarchy of authority could exist in cases where unmarried guardians have disagreements as to the medical treatment for their children.
"Guardians are given a range of powers and rights under the Guardianship of Infants Act that allow them to input into what happens to their children, irrespective of them being father or mother of the child. To suggest that in cases of conflict the mother’s rights outweigh that of the other guardian seem illogical," he said.
The circuit court judge who had heard the case on appeal from the district court, Mr Justice Moriarty said, was left in the unenviable position of exercising a power conferred upon her by the Guardianship of Infants Act 1964 to make orders in the best interests of the child.
The high court said early Monday that 75-year-old farmer Vernon Bowman of Indiana violated Monsanto’s patent rights when he purchased a mix of seeds from a grain elevator that he later planted on his Midwest farm. That mix included patented Roundup Ready soybean seeds manufactured by Monsanto that are sold under license because they can hold up against their namesake, a nasty pesticide regularly used on farms.
Bowman argued that he could do whatever he wanted with the Roundup Ready seeds since he obtained them rightfully from a grain elevator and the terms of Monsanto’s licensing agreement under the patent did not apply to him. Under Monsanto’s terms, Roundup Ready seeds can only be harvested once and must not be saved or reused.
Fear emanates from ignorance and in the uneducated. For this reason many people say 'knowledge is power.' Thus, if you learn more about vaccinations, your decision to vaccinate will be based upon sound reason, knowledge of the scinece behind vaccinations and the historical evidence. How does this explain why we find the MOST EDUCATED section of American society has set a trend NOT to vaccinate? What have they learned in their investigations of science and history? What do they know after weighing the pros and cons and risks to benefit ratios that has set the stage for refusal to vaccinate either themselves or their children?
Does this mean those who choose not to vaccinate come from a place of fear or of knowledge? And, in addition, some of the recent statistics for the decline trend of vaccination ALSO come from an uneducated population who select not to vaccinate based on fear? Does it correlate that less understanding of science and information about the science of immunization will result in less vaccination due to fears of vaccine risks? The survey makes this conclusion.
I would be very interested to learn what information was given to the survey participants. I would like to know precisely what 'science' information was given and whether facts were skewed, biased or all viewpoints were presented Let us delve deeper into the mindset and explanation of why the percentages of adults surveyed decided vaccine side effects caused risk or not?
In fact, the great concern by local, state and federal government today regarding low vaccination rates may differe when making broad statements from a select group of UK adults. If the majority felt vaccines were safe without taking a closer look at the nuances of vaccine safety, ingredients, time of injection, testing, numbers of vaccines given, etc. then we need to understand the purpose of the survey and why we receive broad sweeping conclusions?
Reading further in the news report, we learn there have been recent outbreaks of disease linked to percentage of vaccines given. Plus, the repetition of the government sanctioned mantra that there is no link between autism and vaccines even though the public outcry from suffering families feel otherwise. This weekend, I met a family with an autistic boy who was told the MMR was not responsible for the child's disease and disability. However, the parents affirm to this day 7 years later, that they only saw a decline in behavior, digestion and autism spectrum symptoms after the injection. The more the mainstream media repeats an untruth to the educated public reading alternative news media, the less educated people will believe these reports and surveys. Especially since Dr Wakefield was exonerated and every week more scientific data substantiates the link between autism and the MMR vaccine, and more physicians and scientists speak out in favor of caution from vaccine risks to health
Do you feel it is a weak understanding in science or a greater understanding and knowledge in science that fuels the decrease in vaccination rates?
HuffPost on Gardasil with Dr Harper
To help protect our newest coming-of-age generation, many states are pushing bills through their legislation that would require girls as young as 11 to get the vaccine. (Gardasil is approved to be used by girls as young as nine years old). Thankfully, parents have the option to opt their daughters out of the vaccine by signing a waiver.
Studies are now finding that, when mixed with other vaccines, especially the Meningococcal vaccine Menactra (that vaccine that is mandatory for college entrance) – Gardasil elevates your chances of Guillain-Barre Syndrome anywhere from two to 12 percent. Accepted scientific standards recognize these levels as medically significant, and should not be ignored.
Gardasil is a vaccine that protects males and females from a range of cancers (including cervical and anal cancers) and other diseases caused by human papillomavirus (HPV). It is administered as three injections over six months.
Gardasil has been offered to females aged 12-13 years through schools, as part of the National Immunisation Program, since 1 April 2007. From February 2013, Gardasil has also been offered to males aged 12-13 years through the National HPV Vaccination Program.
The TGA published a safety update regarding Gardasil on 24 June 2010. Since then, the TGA has continued to monitor the vaccine In that time, the TGA has identified no new safety signals. As with other regulators around the world, the TGA continues to consider Gardasil to be safe and effective.