Vaccinations: The Medical, Legal, and Social Implications

A place to relax and socialize - to muse, think aloud and suggest

Re: Vaccinations: The Legal, Social, and Medical Implication

Unread postby ICfreely on Sat Feb 23, 2019 8:33 am

Matthew 18:3

3 And said, “Truly I tell you, unless you change and become like little children, you will never enter the kingdom of heaven.

https://biblia.com/bible/Matthew18.3



The "Biblical Diseases" and U.S. Vaccine Diplomacy
Peter J. Hotez
The Brown Journal of World Affairs
Vol. 12, No. 2 (WINTER / SPRING 2006), pp. 247-258



THE NEGLECTED TROPICAL DISEASES; ANCIENT BIBLICAL AFFLICTIONS

As the major global health partnerships and international advocacy efforts coalesce into an anti-HIV/AIDS, tuberculosis, and malaria juggernaut, it is possible to conclude mistakenly that the big three account for the entire developing world's burden of infectious diseases, perhaps with some added concern about the threat from emerging viruses such as avian influenza, the West Nile virus, and Ebola. However, a re-analysis of global disease statistics reveals the important, yet previously unrecognized impact of a group of 13-15 NTDs…

Because of their link to poverty, the NTDs stigmatize those afflicted. Furthermore, several NTDs such as leprosy, Buruli ulcer, trachoma, lymphatic filariasis, schistosomiasis, and guinea worm are disfiguring and cause afflicted individuals to be either shunned or ostracized by their families and communities. This latter feature is prominently described in the Bible and other ancient texts, particularly for leprosy, guinea worm, and schistosomiasis. Therefore, unlike avian influenza, HIV/AIDS, and other emerging infections, the NTDs are considered ancient conditions. Another common feature is that their link with poverty rules out any meaningful commercial market for treatments; major pharmaceutical companies do not undertake initiatives to develop new drugs or vaccines for the NTDs.


THE LARGER FRAMEWORK OF VACCINE DIPLOMACY

Previous articles have discussed the theoretical and practical bases of incorporating vaccine research and infectious disease control as a component of U.S. foreign policy. The modern era of vaccine diplomacy began when the U.S. virologist Dr. Albert Sabin collaborated with his counterparts in the Soviet Union to develop and test the live oral polio vaccine (OPV). After OPV was developed in the United States in the mid-1950s, it was tested in millions of Soviet schoolchildren before being licensed in the United States. Therefore, the development and testing of OPV was a joint U.S.-Soviet venture occurring at the height of the cold war, shortly after the Sputnik launch in 1956. Conquering polio was followed by additional U.S.-Soviet cooperation that led to improved formulations of the smallpox vaccine and eventually to the global eradication of smallpox in 1977. Some of our greatest medical and public health achievements were brought about because of back-channel scientific collaborations between cold war adversaries…


A CHANCE FOR LEADERSHIP

Former secretary of state Henry Kissinger has pointed out that for a humanitarian intervention to be effective, it must both be sustained by U.S. domestic opinion and, at the same time, resonate with the international community. The biblical legacy of the NTDs, together with their enormous impact on global health and poverty and the relatively low cost of NTD intervention efforts, satisfies these criteria. Joseph Nye, Jr. has emphasized the high probability of success ("good consequences") as an important motivating principle for humanitarian intervention.' The identification of deworming and other NTD control measures as possible "quick wins" relative to other global health programs provides additional optimism for their likely success as a form of U.S. humanitarian intervention.

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1T7AVIXxebBGHWwMdyfomGPx_ympWxmA3/view



Global Christianity and the Control of Its Neglected Tropical Diseases
Peter J. Hotez
Published: November 20, 2014

Prior to the Pew Forum's findings, I reported on an unexpectedly high burden of disease resulting from neglected tropical diseases in Catholic-majority countries [2]. If we now pair the Pew Forum numbers on global Christianity with new information released by the World Health Organization (WHO) and other sources on neglected tropical diseases (NTDs) [3]–[10], an astonishing picture of disease and poverty in Christendom emerges.

The latest information from WHO's Preventive Chemotherapy and Transmission Control (PCT) Databank allows us to superimpose onto the Pew Forum findings the number people who require treatment for either intestinal helminth infections [3], [4] or schistosomiasis [5], [6] (also shown in Table 1). Almost one-third of the world's children who require regular deworming for intestinal helminth infections and one-half of the world's population requiring schistosomiasis chemotherapy live in the eight leading regions where Christians live. Yet only about 13% of the world's population lives in these countries.

Christian institutions and organizations could have an important role in expanding the control or treatment of NTDs among the 1.3 billion Christians estimated to live in the Global South. As was pointed out earlier, both local archdioceses of the Catholic Church and Catholic charities have been involved in implementing deworming and other preventive chemotherapy strategies [2], but there are opportunities for the Vatican to have an expanded role particularly because of the unique commitment by Pope Francis to the poor

Today, the NTDs represent some of the most common afflictions of global Christianity. It is especially noteworthy that Chagas disease and HAT are today almost exclusively a disease of impoverished Christians. Through NTDs, a renewed dialogue with faith-based organizations that work in developing countries and elements of the hierarchy of the Christian Church could make an important difference in global Christianity and the lives of the world's poorest people.

https://journals.plos.org/plosntds/article?id=10.1371/journal.pntd.0003135



In New Book, Dr. Peter J. Hotez Argues Most Neglected Tropical Diseases Can Be Found in World’s Wealthiest Countries
By Maggie Galehouse | September 6, 2016

Dr. Peter J. Hotez
became the voice of the Zika virus some 18 months ago, in part because of his prescience.

“I was one of the first to predict, in 2014, that Zika was coming to the western hemisphere,” said Hotez, M.D., Ph.D., and dean of the National School of Tropical Medicine at Baylor College of Medicine. “Then, at the end of 2015, I wrote that Zika was headed to Florida, to the Gulf Coast.”

His New York Times op-ed piece in April 2016, titled “Zika is coming,” drew national attention, as did his interview with National Public Radio in early August.

I have been pretty much predicting everything Zika is going to do,” said Hotez, 58. “I’ve been ahead of the curve every step of the way.

https://www.tmc.edu/news/2016/09/new-book-dr-peter-j-hotez-argues-neglected-tropical-diseases-can-found-worlds-wealthiest-countries/



pre•science

/ˈpreSH(ē)əns,ˈprēSH(ē)əns/

noun: prescience; plural noun: presciences

1. the fact of knowing something before it takes place; foreknowledge.

"with extraordinary prescience, Jung actually predicted the Nazi eruption"

synonyms: far-sightedness, foresight, foreknowledge; psychic powers, clairvoyance; prediction, prognostication, divination, prophesy, augury; insight, vision, intuition, perception, percipience; third eye; rarevaticination, haruspication, pythonism, prevision, psychism, adumbration

"with the uncanny prescience of children, they had divined that he was a fake”

https://www.google.com/search?q=prescience&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&client=firefox-b-1-ab
ICfreely
Member
 
Posts: 817
Joined: Sat Feb 07, 2015 5:41 pm

Re: Vaccinations: The Legal, Social, and Medical Implication

Unread postby SacredCowSlayer on Sat Feb 23, 2019 3:57 pm

ICfreely » February 23rd, 2019, 2:33 am wrote:. . .
In New Book, Dr. Peter J. Hotez Argues Most Neglected Tropical Diseases Can Be Found in World’s Wealthiest Countries
By Maggie Galehouse | September 6, 2016

Dr. Peter J. Hotez
became the voice of the Zika virus some 18 months ago, in part because of his prescience.

“I was one of the first to predict, in 2014, that Zika was coming to the western hemisphere,” said Hotez, M.D., Ph.D., and dean of the National School of Tropical Medicine at Baylor College of Medicine. “Then, at the end of 2015, I wrote that Zika was headed to Florida, to the Gulf Coast.”

His New York Times op-ed piece in April 2016, titled “Zika is coming,” drew national attention, as did his interview with National Public Radio in early August.

I have been pretty much predicting everything Zika is going to do,” said Hotez, 58. “I’ve been ahead of the curve every step of the way.

https://www.tmc.edu/news/2016/09/new-book-dr-peter-j-hotez-argues-neglected-tropical-diseases-can-found-worlds-wealthiest-countries/


Oh my . . . so we have a “doctor” from none other than BAYLOR Medical who was somehow ( :rolleyes: ) able to “foresee” the Zika Virus (SCAM) in advance? Hmm, I wonder how that is possible . . . :lol:

There is simply no depth to their loads of Bull$hit.
scs

scs@cluesforum.info
SacredCowSlayer
Administrator
 
Posts: 651
Joined: Sat Sep 05, 2015 9:44 pm

Re: Vaccinations: The Legal, Social, and Medical Implication

Unread postby ICfreely on Sat Feb 23, 2019 7:00 pm

Houston, we have a problem.


Peter Jay Hotez, M.D., Ph.D.

Positions

Dean for the National School of Tropical Medicine
Baylor College of Medicine
Houston, United States
Professor
Departments of Pediatrics and Molecular Virology & Microbiology
Baylor College of Medicine
Houston, Texas, United States
Endowed Chair in Tropical Pediatrics
Texas Children's Hospital
Houston, Texas, United States
Co-Director
Texas Children's Hospital Center for Vaccine Development
Houston, Texas, United States
Founding Editor in Chief
PLOS Neglected Tropical Diseases
University Professor
Baylor University
Houston, Texas, United States
Fellow in Disease and Poverty
James A. Baker III Institute for Public Policy
Rice University
Houston, Texas, United States
Health Policy Scholar
Center for Medical Ethics :rolleyes: and Health Policy
Baylor College of Medicine

Education

M.D. from Weill Cornell Medical College
05/1987 - New York, NY, United States

Ph.D. from The Rockefeller University
05/1986 - New York, NY, United States

B.A. (magna cum laude) from Yale University
05/1980 - New Haven, Connecticut, United States

https://www.bcm.edu/people/view/peter-hotez-m-d-ph-d/b1846a47-ffed-11e2-be68-080027880ca6



The Rockefeller University
Science for the benefit of humanity

A New Kind of Hospital

The Rockefeller Institute Hospital, crucial to the institute’s mission, opened in 1910. The first center for clinical research in the United States, it remains a place where researchers can link laboratory investigations with bedside observations to provide a scientific basis for disease detection, prevention, and treatment. Early on, researchers at the hospital studied polio, heart disease, and diabetes, among other diseases. This special hospital environment served as the model for dozens of other clinical research centers established in the next decades.

https://www.rockefeller.edu/about/history/


The Rockefeller Institute

John D. Rockefeller Sr. was the patron of the Institute (1901) and Foundation (1913), which was administered by his assistant Frederick T. Gates and initiated by his son John D. Rockefeller Jr., (born 1874). JDR Jr. “took an interest” in healthcare in the 1890s and organized the original founders of the Rockefeller Institute for Medical Research (RIMR) from the circle of William H. Welch and Daniel Coit Gilman (co-founder of Yale Skull and Bones) of Johns Hopkins University. The popular story of the RIMR’s founding concerns the death of Edith Rockefeller McCormick’s young son in 1901 which also led to the establishment of the McCormick Institute for Infectious Disease in Chicago, although planning for the institutes began many years prior. Christian A. Herter and L. Emmett Holt, both students of W.H. Welch at his JHU laboratory, joined with ‘Junior’ to found the New York City RIMR.

Presidents of RIMR/Rockefeller University
Simon Flexner – 1902 - 1935 founding director
Herbert Spencer Gasser – Dir/pres 1935 - 1953
Detlev Wulf Bronk – Dir/pres 1953 - 1968
Frederick Seitz – 1968 - 1978
Joshua Lederberg – 1978 - 1989
Torsten N. Wiesel – 1992 - 1998
Arnold J. Levine – 1998 - 2002
Paul Nurse - 2003 – 2011
Marc Tessier-Lavigne - 2011 - 2016
Richard P. Lifton – 2016 - present
...
https://polioforever.wordpress.com/the-rockefeller-institute/
https://polioforever.wordpress.com/?s=peter+hotez



A murderers' row of allopathic assassins…
ICfreely
Member
 
Posts: 817
Joined: Sat Feb 07, 2015 5:41 pm

Re: Vaccinations: The Legal, Social, and Medical Implication

Unread postby aa5 on Sun Feb 24, 2019 2:52 am

Contrarian argument for you guys. If I was one of the ultra-elite rulers, and I was well aware that vaccines were not real, I might still permit the vaccines to be given anyways. Well not the current vaccines, but I am talking pure sugar water injections.

And the reason is how women are so irrational with things like infections, allergies and other 'dangers'. For example it is possible that a mother's child could be kidnapped tomorrow from the neighborhood by some child molester, and then their child tortured and killed by that child molester. It is a statistical possibility. The child could also go and play in the forest and eat some rare mushroom and die of poison. Or a wandering cougar could kill the kid in the forest. Or many other possible horrible fates.

And in a vast country as America, a bunch of kids will die tomorrow of bizarre and rare ways of death. It is a statistical reality, that even if something is '1 in a million', when you have a nation of 300 million people, that means it will happen to 300 people. I know the response of women in America to all of these possibilities. And that is the maternal instinct to protect their child from these dangers. So no more kids playing in the woods, no more kids going to the playground unsupervised, and so forth.

Diseases are the same. Women are already using industrial level cleaners to make it so no surface their child comes in contact with has 'germs' on it. We should never have told these people about germs/bacteria in the first place, as they don't have the intellects to comprehend the relative dangers.

But vaccines are doing the opposite. By telling women that by giving their baby a 'magic potion', the baby will never get the illness, then the women do not worry about it(and isolate their children). Of course '1 in a million' kids still get the illness as it always was, but that can be hidden very easily.
aa5
Member
 
Posts: 259
Joined: Fri Apr 15, 2016 3:03 am

Re: Vaccinations: The Legal, Social, and Medical Implication

Unread postby SacredCowSlayer on Sun Feb 24, 2019 4:42 am

Well dear aa5,

I don’t think any particular gender has a monopoly on irrational fear. Please, take it from me before another member reminds you about making such generalizations.

Sincerely, :)
scs

scs@cluesforum.info
SacredCowSlayer
Administrator
 
Posts: 651
Joined: Sat Sep 05, 2015 9:44 pm

Re: Vaccinations: The Legal, Social, and Medical Implication

Unread postby ICfreely on Sun Feb 24, 2019 12:20 pm

aa5 wrote:Contrarian argument for you guys. If I was one of the ultra-elite rulers, and I was well aware that vaccines were not real, I might still permit the vaccines to be given anyways. Well not the current vaccines, but I am talking pure sugar water injections.



I suspect that’s what the Native American diplomats who were given the smallpox vaccine by Edward Gantt in 1801 received – a harmless injection. That’s what I’d do if I wanted to gain the confidence of the people they represented before poisoning them. I wonder how many people took AZT after Magic Johnson went public with his “personal battle” against HIV/AIDS?


A short history of Smallpox Vaccine

…A young calf would receive 30-50 three inch long deep scratches or cuts, while a young cow would endure 100-150 such three inch long cuts would be made in its belly. Into these cuts would be rubbed some lymph or pus from a human suffering from small pox. The calf or young cow would then be confined in a stall in which its head was confined so that it could not lick its wounds. After a week, the vaccinator would return with a special pliers to harvest a combination of blood watered down with lymph. Some pus, a few hairs and scabs were also harvested. The hair and scabs were then filtered out with a fine bronze screen. The resultant “pure” blood/lymph mixture would then be stabilized with glycerin. Later polymyxcin B sulfate, streptomycin sulfate, chlortetracycline hydrochloride, and neomycin sulfate were added.

http://www.vaclib.org/legal/MTstate/smallpox.pdf



That’s how vaccines were produced in the days of (master mason/fellow of the Royal Society) Edward Jenner. We’ve come a long way since then.


Do Vaccines Contain Aborted Fetal Tissue?
By Lisa Jo Rudy | Medically reviewed by Joel Forman, MD
Updated November 21, 2018

While there is no actual fetal tissue in vaccines, some vaccines do have a tenuous link to fetal tissue.

Certain vaccines, including the Mumps Measles Rubella (MMR) vaccine, contain live [?] attenuated (weakened) viruses which can stimulate immunity but cannot cause disease. The viruses are cultured in aborted fetal tissue cells. The cells were obtained more than 50 years ago, as a result of elective abortions — and today the cells are more than three generations removed from their origin.

Regarding the MMR vaccine, the CDC states:

"The rubella vaccine virus is cultured in human cell-line cultures, and some of these cell lines originated from aborted fetal tissue, obtained from legal abortions in the 1960's. No new fetal tissue is needed to produce cell lines to make these vaccines, now or in the future. Fetal tissue is not used to produce vaccines; cell lines generated from a single fetal tissue source are used; vaccine manufacturers obtain human cell lines from FDA-certified cell banks. After processing, very little, if any, of that tissue, remains in the vaccine."

So if there is any tiny residual cellular material in a vaccine, it is from these cell lines. Although these cell lines originated in aborted fetal tissue decades ago, there is no aborted fetal tissue itself in the vaccine.

For Those With Ethical Concerns

For those who are still uncomfortable with this revelation, it might be helpful to know that the Vatican has actually taken a stand on the issue. The Vatican's Pontifical Academy for Life issued a statement in 2005 saying that, though it is wrong to make vaccines using aborted fetal tissue, and that such practices should no longer be employed, it is acceptable to use vaccines developed from abortions that were carried out decades ago, because immunizations play a vital role in protecting life by preventing illness and death.

https://www.verywellhealth.com/do-vaccines-contain-aborted-fetal-tissue-260337


[Note by SCS: I have backed up the above article here as a .pdf.]


You see folks, modern vaccines are not only FDA-certified but they’re approved by the Vicar of Christ himself. If the earthly representative of Christ (a man who’s authorized to absolve sins) has given his blessing, then who are we mere mortals to question his heavenly wisdom?


MORAL REFLECTIONS ON VACCINES PREPARED FROM CELLS DERIVED FROM ABORTED HUMAN FOETUSES
http://www.immunize.org/talking-about-vaccines/vaticandocument.htm
ICfreely
Member
 
Posts: 817
Joined: Sat Feb 07, 2015 5:41 pm

Re: Vaccinations: The Legal, Social, and Medical Implication

Unread postby aa5 on Thu Feb 28, 2019 8:49 am

I was thinking about an analogy to pharmaceuticals. One difference is, drugs are usually given to people who are quite sick, and it is often obvious if the drug is working or not. For example a diuretic for someone with edema. Either the water retention is going down or it’s not.

With vaccines its a lot different to see if the drug is allegedly working.
aa5
Member
 
Posts: 259
Joined: Fri Apr 15, 2016 3:03 am

Re: Vaccinations: The Legal, Social, and Medical Implication

Unread postby sharpstuff on Sat Mar 02, 2019 3:36 pm

[Admin Note (SCS): I have posted this (below) on behalf of our dear member Sharpstuff. He sent an attachment to me- and while somewhat tedious, I found this to be the easiest way to make the post.]



Image
Image
Image
Image
Image
Image
Image
Image
sharpstuff
Member
 
Posts: 149
Joined: Wed Feb 04, 2015 1:31 pm

Re: Vaccinations: The Medical, Legal, and Social Implication

Unread postby patrix on Sat Mar 02, 2019 11:30 pm

Dear Sharpstuff,

I would like to thank you for your insights and especially the books you posted on this thread earlier. Very enlightening. It's telling to see how vaccinations have been opposed and criticized since their invention and that the afflictions they are said to be effective against, have other causes and remedies.

It's apparent to me now that vaccines (ALL vaccines) are nothing but eugenics and engineering of disease.

All the best /Patrix
patrix
Member
 
Posts: 492
Joined: Wed Dec 14, 2016 10:24 am

Re: Vaccinations: The Medical, Legal, and Social Implication

Unread postby ICfreely on Tue Mar 05, 2019 1:55 am

patrix wrote:Dear Sharpstuff,

I would like to thank you for your insights and especially the books you posted on this thread earlier.


Ditto!

Also, I found your "Science Fiction v. Fiction Science" very thought provoking.
(https://cluesforum.info/viewtopic.php?f=27&t=485&start=4575#p2412089)

For some reason it reminded me of one of the most profound quotes I've ever read:


“Just look at us. Everything is backwards, everything is upside down. Doctors destroy health, lawyers destroy justice, psychiatrists destroy minds, scientists destroy truth, major media destroys information, religions destroy spirituality and governments destroy freedom.”

― Michael Ellner




But to fully appreciate Michael Ellner's life and contributions, particularly to the AIDS dissident movement, requires a list of his even more important subjective achievements; the less tangible, more qualitative impacts he had not only on those who were close to him, but as a public figure, on many thousands of people - many dealing with catastrophic illness and life-threatening fears, concerns and conditions. And while there are many in the AIDS dissident community who have factually saved many lives from iatrogenic death and doom, Michael was among the few on the front lines of the AIDS crisis, and from nearly the very beginning.

HEAL was founded in 1982. It was the first major dissident AIDS organization. It was a highly trusted clearinghouse for long term AIDS-survivors, offering the latest alternative challenges to the official AIDS model. Under Michael's leadership, the founding NYC chapter quickly became a well-respected international hub - both practical and spiritual - for information on a wide-ranging list of non-toxic, alternative healthcare options; the demystification of health and illness; and the essential yet too frequently ignored social, emotional and psychospiritual dimensions of AIDS, the true key to the efficacy of health interventions whether alternative or conventional.

Michael grabbed the reins in 1983 and for nearly thirty-five years, steered HEAL right toward the heart of the matter - the deception that fueled and escalated an otherwise containable crisis; one built upon a mountain of factual omissions, and dropped into an ocean of sexual terrorism, emotional exploitation and medical murder. Michael was relentless in deconstructing that mountain and throwing life lines into that ocean. He stood ready to rescue anyone who wanted a steadfast hand, and who'd lost all sense of hope or orientation in the face of the chaos.

Michael was moved very, very deeply by the AIDS disaster. Early in the crisis with the popularization of AZT, he would lose nights of sleep thinking about the fact people were being killed by the high doses. Having grown up in a Jewish family that held tightly to the theme of "always remember" [the same theme that’s been used for Pearl Harbor, 9/11, etc… :( ], he was outraged by the tendency of nearly everybody around him - Jew or Gentile - to dismiss the significance of another medical Holocaust.

Fortunately, as a renowned hypnotist, he saw better than most what he called the "trance logic" employed by both the standard-bearers of the HIV/AIDS fraud and its unwitting victims. How else could one convince oneself that, when deathly ill people took high doses of medically prescribed poison and died, and when symptomless "otherwise healthy" people took high doses of medically prescribed poison and became deathly ill, it had to have been some magic virus no one had ever seen that was killing them, and not the blatantly obvious ingestion of the prescribed poisons anyone could see.

Michael was particularly known for his ability to speak unscripted, straight from the heart, often with characteristically unsettling honesty. He could marshal relentless clarity, hard hitting factual evidence and an incisive humor to serve up punch lines that would dismantle and expose each and every mindless contradiction served up by the HIV/AIDS Establishment.



He likewise authored and/or helped promote such memorable catchphrases as:

"Fire Your Doctor!"

"Disempower the Whitecoats!"

"Hope is Realistic!"

"Expect Health!"

"High-Tech Bone-Pointing"

"Sexual Terrorism"

Whether the things he said raised eyebrows, raised spirits or raised hell, he didn’t care. He spoke the truth as he saw it
B) . (If convincingly shown as much, he could also admit he was wrong.) After being booed at a public talk where as an invited speaker his presentation included open criticism of a friend of the host, he simply turned to me and said, “It’s not the first time I’ve been booed”.

If pithy phrases, trance-busting humor, mesmerizing lectures and unfiltered sentiments weren’t enough, there was his flare for the dramatic. Michael can lay claim to one of the most iconic images from the annals of AIDS history: his routine of invoking the aboriginal death curse known as "bone-pointing". :lol: While donning a white lab coat, he would mockingly wave and shake a large plastic caveman bone prop at the camera, eerily intoning the fake equation, “HIV=AIDS=Death!

But maybe the most important of his contributions was his concept of "The AIDS Zone". Michael knew that understanding the HIV/AIDS fraud in a practical and truly robust fashion required a grasp of both objective and subjective reality. He defined The AIDS Zone as a mass self-hypnotic trance; an unrecognized, but psychosocially necessary space for cultural self-deception.

https://rethinkingaids.com/index.php/michael-ellner-aids-warrior-april-10-1949-february-26-2018



Thomas Dolby She Blinded Me With Science Ultrasound Extended 12 Inch Version
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WZOW5GdgCGw
ICfreely
Member
 
Posts: 817
Joined: Sat Feb 07, 2015 5:41 pm

Re: Vaccinations: The Medical, Legal, and Social Implication

Unread postby aa5 on Fri Mar 08, 2019 9:20 am

I was talking to a friend about all these vaccines they are pushing on her daughter's dogs. Allegedly the dogs need to get these 'booster' vaccines every year or two, to keep immunity.

I was asking her how vaccine technology went so downhill. In the 1960's people only needed to take the vaccine once and it allegedly gave immunity for a whole lifetime. Of course, this is not very profitable to only give one shot for a whole lifetime. A better business is to have to keep giving the same vaccine.

Another concept that seems very questionable to me, is how would you create a 'weakened' virus. Realize viruses are things that have never actually been seen, only speculated to exist. According to the theory the viruses have some ridiculously small amount of DNA, and all they do is latch onto cells and use the cellular machinery to create more viruses. So how could we 'weaken' a virus. If viruses were real things, you wouldn't inject them into babies with undeveloped immune systems.
aa5
Member
 
Posts: 259
Joined: Fri Apr 15, 2016 3:03 am

Re: Vaccinations: The Medical, Legal, and Social Implication

Unread postby ICfreely on Sat Mar 09, 2019 9:26 am

aa5 wrote:I was asking her how vaccine technology went so downhill. In the 1960's people only needed to take the vaccine once and it allegedly gave immunity for a whole lifetime. Of course, this is not very profitable to only give one shot for a whole lifetime. A better business is to have to keep giving the same vaccine.



Awareness

Unvaccinated Children Pose No Risk To Anyone, Says Harvard Immunologist
Published on March 6, 2019 By Richard Enos

“Vaccination at its core is neither a safe nor an effective method of disease prevention.”
-Tetyana Obukhanych, Ph.D. Immunologist

In Brief

The Facts:
Immunologist Tetyana Obukhanych wrote an open letter to legislators who may be thinking about removing vaccine exemptions, and argued that unvaccinated children pose no greater health risk than vaccinated children.

Reflect On:
Can we use our discernment to distinguish between those who are seeking the truth and those who are trying to hide it when it comes to vaccine safety and effectiveness?

[In a word: Yes!]

One of the strengths–and weaknesses–of a Western medical education is its predisposition to break things down and compartmentalize them. While much data is gleaned in the minutiae, very little attention is given to the interrelationship between disciplines. While a medical student may become a true specialist in their field, they too become compartmentalized, and are often ignorant of very important information that would be essential for a broader, more holistic overview. And this appears to be by design.

A case in point is the testimony of Tetyana Obukhanych, who earned her Ph.D. in Immunology at the Rockefeller University in New York and did post-graduate work at Harvard. In a presentation she delivered in British Columbia (full video here), she was discussing scientific evidence from a publication dealing with a measles outbreak in Quebec in 2011. The evidence showed that 48% of those who had contracted measles were fully vaccinated for measles, and this does not even include those who were vaccinated only once for the measles, as they get lumped in with the unvaccinated people. She took a moment to tell a story about how she became aware of this phenomenon:

The interesting thing is that my field, the field of immunology, the basic field that sort of is responsible for all these theories of immunity, we don’t really deal with the real world. We do research in labs. We are sort of an ivory tower profession and we don’t even read these publications because this is too far away from our field. We only read what’s specific to our research and usually it’s immunizations and how antibodies are generated and all the details of the immune responses.

And I went through my whole PhD training and I believed that vaccines give you immunity and that if you got vaccines there is absolutely no way, virtually no way, that you would get a disease, and I’m pretty sure that most of my colleagues in my narrow field believed the same way, and we had conversations about that. And even someone at some point mentioned to me and said that they had a vaccine and they got measles and I sort of brushed it aside and thought that the person is confused. It was either she didn’t have the vaccine or it wasn’t measles, one of the two.

But what happen is that a few years ago I had to apply for American citizenship and part of the procedure is to submit your vaccination records, right, and this was the first time that I looked at my own vaccination records carefully, and I discovered that I had two measles vaccines in my childhood. Well, I didn’t know about it because I was too young to remember, but what I remember really well is that when I was 11 I had measles, and so that was a little bit harder to discount.

And I told recently someone else and they said, ‘Oh, you are confused about that, you didn’t have measles!’ like ‘How do you know?’ ‘Did you check <whether> you really had the virus there or not?’ So it’s just, you know, the doctors diagnosis, right? But I lived in Ukraine, and there, you know, there was tons of measles around and doctors knew when they saw measles. But anyway, so the reason I kind of had to look for these papers is to actually to confirm to myself whether I’m confused about my measles or is this a general phenomenon and it’s happening, and it’s documented in the literature. And indeed it is documented in the literature. But immunologists don’t know about it.


Let that sink in for a moment. You get your PhD in Immunology, and you leave school to go out into the world to work on things like, oh, immunization, and you haven’t learned that you can still get certain diseases even if you’ve been fully vaccinated against them? Despite this being scientifically documented and an uncontested fact? Again, ignorance by design.

Industry Intimidation

For those medical students who become family doctors or pediatricians, the practice of doing independent research into the readily available scientific evidence that contradicts Western medical orthodoxy is certainly frowned upon. Further, those who wish to employ this knowledge in advising their patients often find themselves in the crosshairs of establishment and pharmaceutical industry condemnation.

One example of this is with the painkiller Vioxx, which by some estimates led to 60,000 deaths, and for which Merck had to pay out almost $5 billion to settle 27,000 lawsuits. Merck emails from 1999 showed that company execs sought to intimidate doctors who disliked using Vioxx, or worse. One email said, “We may need to seek them out and destroy them where they live,” while other emails passed on a list of dissenting doctors who they sought to “destroy,” “neutralize,” or “discredit.”(source)

Now, if doctors began to look into the independent research on vaccines and actually spoke out questioning their safety and effectiveness, they would quickly find themselves on such an industry hit list and risk losing their medical licenses, having their reputations destroyed and perhaps even more.

And that is why challenges to the establishment, like the one being waged by Tetyana Obukhanych, is so important to those of us who are simply looking for the objective facts and a reasonable theory that binds them, especially as it pertains to the safety of our children. Scientists like Tetyana generally don’t have any desire to be activists, they would likely rather do scientific research and have a higher authority act properly upon their findings. However, we live in a time when the medical authority is corrupt and money-driven and wields tremendous power over the government. And so the only way a scientist can get the truth out about their findings is to speak that truth themselves. This often means giving up the quiet and secure life as a researcher that they went to school for and going out into the public as an activist.

Defending The Choice Not To Vaccinate

One of the conclusions that Tetyana has come to after investigating real-world scientific findings on the safety and efficacy of vaccines is that children who have not been vaccinated do not pose any increased risk to public health as compared to vaccinated children. In an ‘Open Letter To Legislators Currently Considering Vaccine Legislation,’ she argues to legislators, some of whom are poised to remove vaccine exemptions from their districts, that “discrimination in a public school setting against children who are not vaccinated for reasons of conscience is completely unwarranted.” Below is the full letter, and appendices and footnotes are available in the link above.

Dear Legislator:

My name is Tetyana Obukhanych. I hold a PhD in Immunology. I am writing this letter in the hope that it will correct several common misperceptions about vaccines in order to help you formulate a fair and balanced understanding that is supported by accepted vaccine theory and new scientific findings.

Do unvaccinated children pose a higher threat to the public than the vaccinated?

It is often stated that those who choose not to vaccinate their children for reasons of conscience endanger the rest of the public, and this is the rationale behind most of the legislation to end vaccine exemptions currently being considered by federal and state legislators country-wide.
You should be aware that the nature of protection afforded by many modern vaccines – and that includes most of the vaccines recommended by the CDC for children – is not consistent with such a statement.

I have outlined below the recommended vaccines that cannot prevent transmission of disease either because they are not designed to prevent the transmission of infection (rather, they are intended to prevent disease symptoms), or because they are for non-communicable diseases.
People who have not received the vaccines mentioned below pose no higher threat to the general public than those who have, implying that discrimination against non-immunized children in a public school setting may not be warranted.

1. IPV (inactivated poliovirus vaccine) cannot prevent transmission of poliovirus. (see appendix for the scientific study, Item #1). Wild poliovirus has been non-existent in the USA for at least two decades. Even if wild poliovirus were to be re-imported by travel, vaccinating for polio with IPV cannot affect the safety of public spaces. Please note that wild poliovirus eradication is attributed to the use of a different vaccine, OPV or oral poliovirus vaccine. Despite being capable of preventing wild poliovirus transmission, use of OPV was phased out long ago in the USA and replaced with IPV due to safety concerns.

2. Tetanus is not a contagious disease, but rather acquired from deep-puncture wounds contaminated with C. tetani spores. Vaccinating for tetanus (via the DTaP combination vaccine) cannot alter the safety of public spaces; it is intended to render personal protection only.

3. While intended to prevent the disease-causing effects of the diphtheria toxin, the diphtheria toxoid vaccine (also contained in the DTaP vaccine) is not designed to prevent colonization and transmission of C. diphtheriae. Vaccinating for diphtheria cannot alter the safety of public spaces; it is likewise intended for personal protection only.


[Not only does the DTaP vaccine NOT provide “personal protection” from “the disease-causing effects of the diphtheria toxin”, it increases the likelihood of illness. Consider yourself “Clued In”, dear reader.]

4. The acellular pertussis (aP) vaccine (the final element of the DTaP combined vaccine), now in use in the USA, replaced the whole cell pertussis vaccine in the late 1990s, which was followed by an unprecedented resurgence of whooping cough. An experiment with deliberate pertussis infection in primates revealed that the aP vaccine is not capable of preventing colonization and transmission of B. pertussis. The FDA has issued a warning regarding this crucial finding. [1]

Furthermore, the 2013 meeting of the Board of Scientific Counselors at the CDC revealed additional alarming data that pertussis variants (PRN-negative strains) currently circulating in the USA acquired a selective advantage to infect those who are up-to-date for their DTaP boosters, meaning that people who are up-to-date are more likely to be infected, and thus contagious, than people who are not vaccinated.

5. Among numerous types of H. influenzae, the Hib vaccine covers only type b. Despite its sole intention to reduce symptomatic and asymptomatic (disease-less) Hib carriage, the introduction of the Hib vaccine has inadvertently shifted strain dominance towards other types of H. influenzae (types a through f). These types have been causing invasive disease of high severity and increasing incidence in adults in the era of Hib vaccination of children (see appendix for the scientific study, Item #4). The general population is more vulnerable to the invasive disease now than it was prior to the start of the Hib vaccination campaign. Discriminating against children who are not vaccinated for Hib does not make any scientific sense in the era of non-type b H. influenzae disease.

6. Hepatitis B is a blood-borne virus. It does not spread in a community setting, especially among children who are unlikely to engage in high-risk behaviors, such as needle sharing or sex. Vaccinating children for hepatitis B cannot significantly alter the safety of public spaces. Further, school admission is not prohibited for children who are chronic hepatitis B carriers. To prohibit school admission for those who are simply unvaccinated – and do not even carry hepatitis B – would constitute unreasonable and illogical discrimination.

In summary, a person who is not vaccinated with IPV, DTaP, HepB, and Hib vaccines due to reasons of conscience poses no extra danger to the public than a person who is. No discrimination is warranted.

How often do serious vaccine adverse events happen?

It is often stated that vaccination rarely leads to serious adverse events.

Unfortunately, this statement is not supported by science.

A recent study done in Ontario, Canada, established that vaccination actually leads to an emergency room visit for 1 in 168 children following their 12-month vaccination appointment and for 1 in 730 children following their 18-month vaccination appointment (see appendix for a scientific study, Item #5).

When the risk of an adverse event requiring an ER visit after well-baby vaccinations is demonstrably so high, vaccination must remain a choice for parents, who may understandably be unwilling to assume this immediate risk in order to protect their children from diseases that are generally considered mild or that their children may never be exposed to.

Can discrimination against families who oppose vaccines for reasons of conscience prevent future disease outbreaks of communicable viral diseases, such as measles?

Measles research scientists have for a long time been aware of the “measles paradox.” I quote from the article by Poland & Jacobson (1994) “Failure to Reach the Goal of Measles Elimination: Apparent Paradox of Measles Infections in Immunized Persons.” Arch Intern Med 154:1815-1820:

“The apparent paradox is that as measles immunization rates rise to high levels in a population, measles becomes a disease of immunized persons.” [2]

Further research determined that behind the “measles paradox” is a fraction of the population called LOW VACCINE RESPONDERS. Low-responders are those who respond poorly to the first dose of the measles vaccine. These individuals then mount a weak immune response to subsequent RE-vaccination and quickly return to the pool of “susceptibles’’ within 2-5 years, despite being fully vaccinated. [3]


[Let’s call a spade a spade, shall we? “LOW VACCINE RESPONDERS” is a euphemism invented by allopathic shysters for people who are most susceptible to VACCINE POISONING.]

Re-vaccination cannot correct low-responsiveness: it appears to be an immuno-genetic trait. [4] The proportion of low-responders among children was estimated to be 4.7% in the USA. [5]

[Seeing as ALL VACCINES are toxic; not only will re-vaccination not “correct low-responsiveness”, it will further compound the likelihood of illness(es). Furthermore, if their magic virus catchall reasoning fails, then the shysters can always fall back on DNA.]

Studies of measles outbreaks in Quebec, Canada, and China attest that outbreaks of measles still happen, even when vaccination compliance is in the highest bracket (95-97% or even 99%, see appendix for scientific studies, Items #6&7). This is because even in high vaccine responders, vaccine-induced antibodies wane over time. Vaccine immunity does not equal life-long immunity acquired after natural exposure.

[What a shocker.]

It has been documented that vaccinated persons who develop breakthrough measles are contagious. In fact, two major measles outbreaks in 2011 (in Quebec, Canada, and in New York, NY) were re-imported by previously vaccinated individuals. [6] [7]

Taken together, these data make it apparent that elimination of vaccine exemptions, currently only utilized by a small percentage of families anyway, will neither solve the problem of disease resurgence nor prevent re-importation and outbreaks of previously eliminated diseases.

Is discrimination against conscientious vaccine objectors the only practical solution?


[It’s neither practical nor is it a solution period!]

The majority of measles cases in recent US outbreaks (including the recent Disneyland outbreak) are adults and very young babies, whereas in the pre-vaccination era, measles occurred mainly between the ages 1 and 15.

Natural exposure to measles was followed by lifelong immunity from re-infection, whereas vaccine immunity wanes over time, leaving adults unprotected by their childhood shots. Measles is more dangerous for infants and for adults than for school-aged children.

Despite high chances of exposure in the pre-vaccination era, measles practically never happened in babies much younger than one year of age due to the robust maternal immunity transfer mechanism.

The vulnerability of very young babies to measles today is the direct outcome of the prolonged mass vaccination campaign of the past, during which their mothers, themselves vaccinated in their childhood, were not able to experience measles naturally at a safe school age and establish the lifelong immunity that would also be transferred to their babies and protect them from measles for the first year of life.

Luckily, a therapeutic backup exists to mimic now-eroded maternal immunity. Infants as well as other vulnerable or immunocompromised individuals, are eligible to receive immunoglobulin, a potentially life-saving measure that supplies antibodies directed against the virus to prevent or ameliorate disease upon exposure (see appendix, Item #8).

In summary:

1) due to the properties of modern vaccines, non-vaccinated individuals pose no greater risk of transmission of polio, diphtheria, pertussis, and numerous non-type b H. influenzae strains than vaccinated individuals do, non-vaccinated individuals pose virtually no danger of transmission of hepatitis B in a school setting, and tetanus is not transmissible at all;

2) there is a significantly elevated risk of emergency room visits after childhood vaccination appointments attesting that vaccination is not risk-free;

3) outbreaks of measles cannot be entirely prevented even if we had nearly perfect vaccination compliance; and

4) an effective method of preventing measles and other viral diseases in vaccine-ineligible infants and the immunocompromised, immunoglobulin, is available for those who may be exposed to these diseases.

Taken together, these four facts make it clear that discrimination in a public school setting against children who are not vaccinated for reasons of conscience is completely unwarranted as the vaccine status of conscientious objectors poses no undue risk to the public.

Sincerely Yours,

~ Tetyana Obukhanych, PhD


The Takeaway

The average person is not a scientist, and so relies on the integrity of professionals in order to come to decisions about vaccine safety and effectiveness. Those who have done some research may very well agree with me that industry data on the safety of vaccine is presented in vague and complicated ways, replete with repetitive statements that ‘vaccines have been proven to be safe and effective.’ Meanwhile, the alternative data I have seen generally appears to be written in as simple and understandable a form as possible, and the connection between the theory and the data is much clearer. The vaccine ‘debate,’ if we can even call it that, is an opportunity for all of us to practice our discernment, and see telltale signs of the desire to find and share truth versus the desire to hide the truth for the sake of profit and in complete disregard for human life.

For some, this is difficult because it challenges the worldview that the authorities we have given our power to actually care about humanity and human life. But realizing the fallacy of this helps to motivate us to seek our sovereignty from authority, and contributes to our awakening as a collective.


Related CE Articles:

The Flawed Logic of Hepatitis B Vaccine Mandates

Why You Can’t Trust the CDC on Vaccines

Herd Immunity: A False Rationale for Vaccine Mandates – Are Unvaccinated Children Really Dangerous?

Government Research Confirms Measles Outbreaks Are Transmitted By The Vaccinated

https://www.collective-evolution.com/2019/03/06/unvaccinated-children-pose-no-risk-to-anyone-says-harvard-immunologist/



“Vaccination at its core is a crime against humanity.”
-ICfreely
ICfreely
Member
 
Posts: 817
Joined: Sat Feb 07, 2015 5:41 pm

Re: Vaccinations: The Medical, Legal, and Social Implication

Unread postby CluedIn on Sat Mar 09, 2019 1:16 pm

My granddaughter and daughter-in-law are both in the hospital right now, and it's always a great time to pick the minds of the medical staff. Started talking about vaccines with a nurse (she was pro-vaccine - grandkids are not vaccinated) and I asked her if she was forced to get the flu vaccine at work. She tried to wriggle out of the word "forced" and said that you were allowed to wear a mask instead - from September thru March. I asked her if you refused both what would happen and of course she said she would lose her job.

An educated person (in medicine!) in the US of A sees nothing wrong with the employer forcing them to inject some fluids into their body because "they say so" or you lose your job. I don't know if it's indoctrination, blind faith or stupidity - but they can keep all of their poisons for the people who beLIEve in them. I'm just waiting for the day they tell them to line up for their chips - for the safety of their patients and family!
CluedIn
Member
 
Posts: 292
Joined: Tue Dec 01, 2015 12:15 pm

Re: Vaccinations: The Medical, Legal, and Social Implication

Unread postby ICfreely on Sat Mar 09, 2019 5:43 pm

Meet young shyster Ethan Lindenberger - a Reddit "genius", vaccine advocate and mainstream media darling who's become quite the sensation of late.


Physicians and Advocates Warn Senate Committee of Vaccine Hesitancy Implications

C-SPAN Video Library

March 5, 2019 Last Aired March 9, 2019

Hearing on Vaccines and Outbreaks

The Senate Health Committee held a hearing to examine vaccines & preventable outbreaks. Testifying were public health experts and officials, as well as an 18-year-old high school student who grew up in a household led by parents who did not allow their children to receive standard vaccines but had decided to get immunized for hepatitis, influenza and other vaccine-preventable diseases after reaching adulthood. The witnesses talked about the threat of anti-vaccine rhetoric and the recent measles outbreak that has resulted from pockets of parents in Washington, California and elsewhere who have refused to immunize their children against the once-erradicated [sic] disease.

Video:

https://www.c-span.org/search/?searchtype=All&query=vaccine+%26+public+health



18-Year-Old Testifies About Getting Vaccinated Despite Mother's Anti-Vaccine Beliefs

James Doubek March 6, 2019

Eighteen-year-old Ethan Lindenberger appeared before the Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor and Pensions on Tuesday to talk about how he decided to get vaccinated against the wishes of his mother, who is anti-vaccine.
Lindenberger is a senior at Norwalk High School in Norwalk, Ohio. He gained attention in November by asking about how to get vaccinated despite the opposition of his "kind of stupid parents" in a discussion on Reddit.

https://www.npr.org/2019/03/06/700617424/18-year-old-testifies-about-getting-vaccinated-despite-mothers-anti-vaccine-beli


I’m ethan, an 18 year old who made national headlines for getting vaccinated despite an antivaxx mother. AMA!

Unique Experience

Back in November I made a Reddit port to r/nostupidquestions regarding vaccines. That blew up and now months later, I’ve been on NBC, CNN, FOX News, and so many more.
The article written on my family was the top story on the Washington post this past weekend, and I’ve had numerous news sites sharing this story. I was just on GMA as well, but I haven’t watched it yet
You guys seem to have some questions and I’d love to answer them here!

https://www.reddit.com/r/IAmA/comments/apxlfk/im_ethan_an_18_year_old_who_made_national/



Moral of the story: Don't trust any health related "rumors and misinformation" from "online sources" except for trusted authorities like the CDC, FDA, AMA and all the other XYZ's of officialdom.

How low can they go?
ICfreely
Member
 
Posts: 817
Joined: Sat Feb 07, 2015 5:41 pm

Re: Vaccinations: The Medical, Legal, and Social Implication

Unread postby SacredCowSlayer on Sat Mar 09, 2019 6:09 pm

CluedIn » March 9th, 2019, 7:16 am wrote:My granddaughter and daughter-in-law are both in the hospital right now, and it's always a great time to pick the minds of the medical staff. Started talking about vaccines with a nurse (she was pro-vaccine - grandkids are not vaccinated) and I asked her if she was forced to get the flu vaccine at work. She tried to wriggle out of the word "forced" and said that you were allowed to wear a mask instead - from September thru March. I asked her if you refused both what would happen and of course she said she would lose her job.

An educated person (in medicine!) in the US of A sees nothing wrong with the employer forcing them to inject some fluids into their body because "they say so" or you lose your job. I don't know if it's indoctrination, blind faith or stupidity - but they can keep all of their poisons for the people who beLIEve in them. I'm just waiting for the day they tell them to line up for their chips - for the safety of their patients and family!

[Bold inserted above by SCS for emphasis.]


Dear CluedIn,

Thank you for sharing that exchange with us. And bravo for having the stomach to engage people like that in such discussions.

It was probably 3–4 years ago that I last even had a conversation with an “unsafe” (I’ll call her DODMOM—or, DM for short) person about the issue. It went something like this:

DM: “I think parents who don’t vaccinate their children are selfishly putting all the other children (of responsible parents) in danger! And they shouldn’t be allowed to attend school with the others!”

Me: (calmly) “So, I want to make sure I understand your position here. Children who are healthy, but unvaccinated, present a health danger to the vaccinated kids at school?”

DM: “Yes, they might be a carrier of one of these diseases (but show no symptoms) because they haven’t been vaccinated, and they could get the other children sick!”

Me: “Okay, now I’m really confused. Do the vaccinations work or not?”

DM: “Of course they work! But only if ALL the kids get vaccinated!”

Me: “So, a vaccinated child is safe (from the given disease) because of the vaccine, so long as he doesn’t come into contact with a carrier of the disease . . . is that what you are saying?”

DM: (after a minute of blank staring—then escalated anger) “Well, I just know it works! I guess you would have us go back to a world with polio and small pox then, huh?”

Me: “Just get back to me when you can explain how a healthy unvaccinated child is supposed to get a vaccinated child sick—and from the very thing they are supposedly protected from, via (of course) the vaccination. And maybe explain to me why the vaccinated child is somehow in a healthier position than the unvaccinated child . . . you know, while you’re at it.”

DM: “No. I’m done discussing this with you.”

Me: “Yeah, that’s probably best.”
___________

Unfortunately, it would appear that a substantial portion of the population has been mentally vaccinated against basic logic and genuine critical thinking.

And the levels of animosity accompanied by the usual dogmatism are extraordinarily high when it comes to this topic.

It’s clear to me that a sea of well funded (and unmitigated) indoctrination has effectively “vaccinated” the institutionalization of vaccinations themselves.

May we each find our own ways to keep up the good fight. It’s an uphill battle to be sure. But I do think there is fear that their curtain may be showing signs of distress.
scs

scs@cluesforum.info
SacredCowSlayer
Administrator
 
Posts: 651
Joined: Sat Sep 05, 2015 9:44 pm

PreviousNext

Return to THE LIVING ROOM

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests