A second look at vaccination – answers that cannot be questioned

29th July 2019

 ‘No man can be forced to be healthful, whether he will or not. In a free society, individuals must judge for themselves what information they choose to heed and what they ignore.’ John Locke. ‘A letter concerning Toleration’

Here, I am going have another look at vaccination, before scurrying away from the subject for a bit, and getting back to the safe ground of cardiovascular disease. Much to the relief of some of the regular readers of this blog, no doubt.

I have to say that I thought long and hard about blogging on vaccination. It is the most brutal area for discussion that I have ever seen, and a reputation shredder. If you even dare to hint that there may just be the slightest issue with any vaccine, people come down upon you like a ton of bricks.

I also know that by daring to write on this subject, there will inevitably be people moving behind the scenes to have my blog taken down. I cannot imagine WordPress management going to the wire to protect my right to free speech. A little flick of a switch, and I will be gone from the airwaves.

However, as we move towards a world where it seems that all Governments around the world are going to pass laws mandating vaccination for everyone, and people are fined, or lose their jobs, for speaking out, or refusing to be vaccinated, then I feel that some attempt to discuss the area is essential.

Because, once something becomes mandatory, and any research into possible harms moves strictly off limits, we really need to be absolutely one hundred per-cent certain that there is no possibility that we may be doing harm. Or, that we are reducing any potential harm to the lowest level possible.

Can vaccines do harm?

‘Prof Martin Gore, 67, one of the UK’s leading cancer scientists, has died, the Royal Marsden NHS foundation trust has said. His death was following a yellow fever vaccination.’ 1

A tragedy for a brilliant medical researcher and his family. It was brought to my attention by my wife, who knew him quite well.

However, even here, we can see any criticism of vaccines being toned down and deflected. The words ‘caused by’ were carefully avoided. It was reported that he died following a yellow fever vaccination – which could mean he was vaccinated, then got hit by a bus. In fact, if you read a little more deeply, it becomes inarguable that the yellow fever vaccine was the direct cause of his death.

Yes, such an event is rare, but such events do occur. People can die following vaccinations, as a direct cause of that vaccination, although the information can be very difficult to find. In Germany, the Paul-Erlich Institute [PEI] is the organisation responsible for the reporting of vaccine security/safety.

‘Between 1978 and 1993 approximately 13,500 cases of undesired effects resulting from medications for vaccinations was reported to the Paul Erlich Institute (PEI) which is the institute which is responsible for vaccine security; the majority was reported by the pharmaceutical industry. In 40% of cases the complications were severe, 10% pertained to fatalities on account of the effects.’ 2

Yes, the numbers are relatively small – although by no means vanishingly small. In a fifteen-year period that is 1,350 deaths. If the Germans are preventing tens of thousands of deaths a year through vaccination, then a thousand severe complications and a hundred deaths or so, per year, may be a price worth paying? Discuss.

Primum non nocere

My own view is that you should never compel people to undergo a medical procedure that could result in severe damage – or death. But my philosophy is very much on the radical libertarian end of the spectrum. Others feel that personal liberties should be restricted for the overall good of society. A central philosophical divide, I suppose.

One of the other interesting facts from the Paul-Erlich Institute is that ‘severe cases’ of vaccine damage, that occur, that must be reported, include:

  • Encephalopathia: Encephalopathia is frequently overlooked as it does not always entail severe symptoms. However, there can later be developmental retardation. Encephalopathia can also trigger cri encéphalique
  • Seizures
  • Epilepsy
  • Autism
  • Sleeping sickness 2

These are not my words; these are the words of the PEI.

This list obviously raises the issue of potential brain damage following vaccination. Something that was seen with Pandemrix, used to protect against Swine Flu (HIN1).

‘An increased risk of narcolepsy was found following vaccination with Pandemrix, a monovalent 2009 HIN1 influenza vaccine that was used in several European countries during the HIN1 influenza pandemic. Narcolepsy is a chronic neurological caused by the brain’s inability to regulate the sleep-wake cycles normally. This risk was initially found in Finland, and then some other European countries also detected an association. Most recently, scientists at the United Kingdom’s Health Protection Agency (HPA) have found evidence of an association between Pandemrix and narcolepsy in children in England. The findings are consistent with studies from Finland and other countries.’ 2

[A finding not seen in any safety testing carried out prior to the launch of Pandemrix]

Thus, not only can vaccines cause severe reactions up to, and including, death. They can also lead to neurological damage such as narcolepsy. Is this all specifically to do with the vaccine itself, or the preservative it is carried in, or something else? Who knows?

Yet, and yet, despite the apparently indisputable evidence that vaccines can, and do, cause neurological damage we can find articles such as this below. Chosen pretty much at random, but it sums up the current mainstream thinking.

The “urban myth” of the association between neurological disorders and vaccinations

‘In modern society, a potentially serious adverse event attributed to a vaccination is likely to be snapped up by the media, particularly newspapers and television, as it appeals to the emotions of the public. The widespread news of the alleged adverse events of vaccination has helped to create the “urban myth” that vaccines cause serious neurological disorders and has boosted antivaccination associations. This speculation is linked to the fact that the true causes of many neurological diseases are largely unknown. The relationship between vaccinations and the onset of serious neuropsychiatric diseases is certainly one of coincidence rather than causality. This claim results from controlled studies that have excluded the association between vaccines and severe neurological diseases, therefore it can be said, with little risk of error, that the association between modern vaccinations and serious neurological disorders is a true “urban myth”. 3

What is being stated here, very forcefully indeed, is that there is no causal relationship between vaccination and neurological damage. It is simply a myth. I find the two bodies of evidence here impossible to reconcile.

Just to give two examples, the Paul Erlich Institute records encephalopathia, seizures, epilepsy, deaths and suchlike, following vaccination. The Pandemrix vaccine, in turn, has been proven to cause narcolepsy. Even the manufacturers, GSK, admitted that it did.

‘The 2009 H1N1 influenza pandemic left a troubling legacy in Europe: More than 1300 people who received a vaccine to prevent the flu developed narcolepsy, an incurable, debilitating condition that causes overpowering daytime sleepiness, sometimes accompanied by a sudden muscle weakness in response to strong emotions such as laughter or anger. The manufacturer, GlaxoSmithKline (GSK), has acknowledged the link, and some patients and their families have already been awarded compensation. But how the vaccine might have triggered the condition has been unclear.4

This is… I am not sure what it is. The evidence clearly says one thing, yet we are told we must believe that this evidence is simply an ‘urban myth.’ I feel as though I have been transported to Wonderland, or some scary totalitarian state, where the truth cannot be spoken.

Even when it comes to the most contentious area of all, vaccines and autism, it appears to have been accepted – at least in one case in the US – that vaccination lead to autism, with a girl called Hannah Polling.

‘Officials at the US Department of Health and Human Services investigating Hannah’s medical history said that vaccine had ‘significantly aggravated an underlying mitochondrial disorder, which predisposed her to deficits in energy metabolism’, causing damage ‘with features of autism spectrum disorder’. 2

The final part of the statement was very difficult to understand. ‘The officials said that the vaccine didn’t cause her autism, but ‘resulted’ in it.’ The vaccine resulted in her autism. Or, her autism resulted in her vaccination?

I have tried that statement a few different ways around, and I have no idea what that means. A lead to B, but A did not cause B. Because B resulted in A…

“Then you should say what you mean,” the March Hare went on.

I do, “ Alice hastily replied; “at least I mean what I say, that’s the same thing, you know.”

“Not the same thing a bit!” said the Hatter. “Why, you might just as well say that “I see what I eat” is the same thing as “I eat what I see!”  Alice in Wonderland.

However, the Polling case does raise a further potentially important issue. Namely, that it seems possible that some people have underlying ‘mitochondrial dysfunction,’ and that vaccination may aggravate this problem, with potentially serious consequences.

Narcolepsy, for example, is believed by some researchers to be a problem with energy production in the mitochondria. Others feel that ME/CFS (myalgic encephalomyelitis/chronic fatigue syndrome) could be the result of a mitochondrial dysfunction triggered by various viral infections and, therefore, possibly vaccination?

All of which means that the possibility exists that vaccination could trigger, or exacerbate, significant mitochondrial dysfunction in susceptible individuals. This may or may not be true, but it must surely be an area for research?

To my mind it would be extremely important to establish if mitochondrial dysfunction represents a ‘risk’ for vaccination. We could then identify, using some genetic/epigenetic test, those individuals who are more likely to be damaged by vaccination. At which point we could look at ways to prevent the risk of damage – however small that risk may – be in a susceptible population.

For example, it could be possible to space out the vaccines, or only give separate vaccinations to these individuals. Maybe we could avoid vaccinating against relatively mild conditions e.g. chicken pox, or rubella (in boys) in these individuals. To me, these things seem eminently sensible areas for study.

However, it seems that we are trapped within a paradigm where it is impossible to suggest that any vaccine, for any disease, may be associated with/cause any degree of harm. In such an environment, objective scientific research becomes impossible. ‘As vaccine can harm no-one, we cannot try to find out who may be harmed. Thank you, comrade.’

As you can probably tell, I find this all very worrying and deeply, deeply, disturbing. If science has any purpose it is to seek the truth – however much that upsets the current status quo. When I see, what I believe to be important and valid questioning being crushed, I find it almost physically painful.

If that questioning results in the finding that vaccines truly do not cause any adverse effects, then that is fine. I would be more than happy with that outcome, although it currently seems inarguable that vaccines do cause adverse effects. However, as I see it, we currently have a situation whereby:

  • Pharmaceutical companies do their own safety testing on vaccines (somewhat like Boeing did on the 737 Max 8). The regulatory authorities have been, effectively, side-lined.
  • Many safety studies have only lasted days, with little or no research on any long-term effects. In fact, as far as I can establish, there has been no long-term safety research [see under Pandemrix]
  • Some vaccines have been proven to cause neurological damage
  • The preservatives and adjuvants in vaccines have not been studied for safety
  • There has never been a randomised controlled clinical study on the efficacy of any vaccine – beyond looking for a raised level of antibodies
  • Some/many people can suffer from the diseases they have been vaccinated against – and this is not monitored in any way.

Any of these things should be a very large red flag.

Looking specifically at efficacy, on that list, it is usually stated that vaccines are rigorously tested for efficacy. Here is what the University of Oxford has to say in its site ‘Vaccine Knowledge Project.’

‘Phase III trials gather statistically significant data on the vaccine’s safety and efficacy (how well it works). This means looking at whether the vaccine generates a level of immunity that would prevent disease, and provides evidence that the vaccine can actually reduce the number of cases.5

However, this does not actually test whether a vaccine really does reduce the number of cases of a disease. As I wrote in the previous blog, even in population with a 98% vaccination rate against measles, a school population still suffered a measles outbreak, and many of those previously vaccinated suffered from measles.

Which means that the statement from the Vaccine Knowledge Project…. and provides evidence that the vaccine can actually reduce the number of cases’ needs to be read very carefully. It could be taken to mean ‘provides all the evidence needed.’ Which is what it has been crafted to imply. However, it actually means ‘provides evidence regarding a ‘surrogate end-point’ which suggests that vaccines may reduce the number of cases.

If you want to know if a vaccine really works, vaccinate a hundred thousand people against a disease. Do not vaccinate another hundred thousand people (matched and randomised) – and then see what happens. Then you will know how well your vaccine works.

This is a requirement of all other forms of medical intervention (with provisos), but it is not a requirement for vaccines. A true efficacy study does not simply look at a ‘surrogate’ marker. It needs to study hard endpoints e.g. how many people are truly protected against the disease. Also, what the rate of adverse events may be.

Of course, there are those who think that such a trial would be ridiculous and unethical. Here, I quote from a website KevinMD:

‘….as some have actually demanded, we must have a randomized controlled trial (RCT), the gold standard of clinical research. RCTs use random assignment of subjects to one group or the other, in this case vaccine or a placebo (fake vaccine), and ensure both the subjects and evaluation team be blinded to who got what.

Think about this for a minute. They are demanding parents agree to subject their child to a trial in which they have a 50/50 chance of getting a fake vaccine. All this to satisfy the concerns of vaccine deniers.

It would be incredibly unethical to do such a study, and no institutional review board (aka human studies committee) would ever approve such a thing. For such trials, there must be reasonable uncertainty about which group is getting the better treatment, and in this case, there is none. The bottom line is any vaccine skeptic who demands proof like this is being massively disingenuous. It’s akin to demanding a randomized controlled trial of parachutes.’ 6

What is being said here is that there is no uncertainty that vaccines work, so there is no need for a randomised controlled trial. The counter argument to this is simply to turn the argument inside out. Without an RCT, how do you know that vaccines work? Where is your evidence? Or does ‘just knowing that it works’, count?

Medicine is littered with examples of interventions that were considered so inarguably beneficial that no trials were ever done. Strict bed rest following an MI, the radical mastectomy, x-ray screening for lung cancer, PCI in the non-acute setting.

Bernard Lown was a man who dared challenge the ‘unquestionable’ benefits of coronary artery bypass surgery. He had a long and arduous battle to publish his evidence that CABG may cause more harm than benefit. His blog on this, ‘A Maverick’s Lonely Path in Cardiology (Essay 28)’, is well worth a read. As he concludes:

‘A new treatment, whether involving drugs or procedures, is improper without indubitable supporting evidence of benefit. The patients’ well-being must not be compromised by imagined good when countervailing interests are at the same time being served. Our forty-year struggle essentially concerned medicine’s first and inviolate principle, primum non nocere. “First do no harm” is the litmus test sanctioning the privilege to practice medicine.’ 7

Bernard Lown is one hundred per cent correct, and I find it difficult to conceive that anyone who has the slightest understanding of science could write the words ‘The bottom line is any vaccine skeptic who demands proof like this [an RCT] is being massively disingenuous.’

Disingenuous… Personally, I demand proof like this for all medical interventions, wherever possible, and so should everyone else. The reason why, is because evidence from controlled clinical trials (with all their inherent flaws) is the only tool that we possess to properly assess benefit vs. harm. Without such evidence we are simply hoping and praying that benefits truly outweigh any downsides.

For example, with the Pandemrix vaccine. Had an RCT been done, it is possible, even probable, that the adverse impact on Narcolepsy would have been picked up. Therefore, it would not have been used, therefore many thousands of people would not have been harmed – above and beyond narcolepsy. Some of the key issues around Pandemrix were discussed in the BMJ article ‘Pandermix vaccine: why was the public not told of early warning signs?’

‘Eight years after the pandemic influenza outbreak, a lawsuit alleging that GlaxoSmithKline’s Pandemrix vaccine caused narcolepsy has unearthed internal reports suggesting problems with the vaccine’s safety.

‘…the raw numbers of adverse events were not small. Although it is often said that perhaps only up to 10% of adverse events are reported to national reporting systems, by late November, GSK had received 1138 serious adverse event reports for Pandemrix—a rate of 76 per million doses administered. By mid-December, there had been 3280 serious adverse event reports (68/million doses). The last report seen by the BMJ, dated 31 March 2010, shows 5069 serious adverse events for Pandemrix (72/million doses).8

As the article goes on to say:

“What is the purpose of pharmacovigilance if nobody is acting on the information? This information took eight years to come to light through academic work and litigation. Is this acceptable? If the information at our disposal is partial, that is the direct consequence of secrecy, which should not surround any public health intervention.”

Pandemrix and Arepanrix were designed for a pandemic and were removed from global markets after the pandemic. Whatever adverse events they may have caused, they are vaccines of the past. But the events of 2009-10 raise fundamental questions about the transparency of information. When do public health officials have a duty to warn the public over possible harms of vaccines detected through pharmacovigilance? How much detail should the public be provided with, who should provide it, and should the provision of such information be proactive or passive?’

All good questions.

Had Pandemrix not caused narcolepsy in large numbers, litigation against GSK would not have taken place – in Ireland. Had this not happened, data about the high rate of other adverse effect would never have seen the light of day. It seems that the European Medicines Agency had little interest in the matter.

‘What EMA knew—or could have known—about the comparative safety of GSK’s pandemic vaccines is hard to discern. It told The BMJ that “EMA does not perform comparative benefit and risk evaluations between products approved in the EU, or between EU products and products approved or used outside the EU.”

So, if monitoring product safety is not of interest to them, what exactly do the EMA do? Central here, however, is the fact that we had a vaccine causing a high number of serious adverse events and no-one did, or said, anything. Had there not been a lawsuit, we would still have been unaware of any problems. At least that is my understanding of what happened here.

Does anyone care? Well, in many countries you cannot even sue the manufacturer if a vaccine damages you – as also mentioned in the BMJ article.

‘Another element, adopted by countries such as Canada, the US, UK, France, and Germany, was to provide vaccine manufacturers indemnity from liability for wrongdoing, thereby reducing the risk of a lawsuit stemming from vaccine related injury.’ Quite extraordinary. In my view, beyond extraordinary.

A manufacturer makes a product that you believe may have damaged or killed a loved one, and you cannot do anything about it. Or, those who made the product cannot be sued. In banking they have a phrase for this. They call it moral hazard.

‘lack of incentive to guard against risk where one is protected from its consequences, e.g. by insurance.’ In this case no insurance is required. Governments have given pharmaceutical companies a free pass. Depending on your belief in the inherent ethical standards of pharmaceutical companies you may – or may not – find this reassuring.

Personally, I find it extremely worrying that people, and the entire medical profession, appear willing to accept that all vaccines, for all conditions, are entirely effective and have no adverse effects…. Even when it has been demonstrated, beyond doubt, that they do.

Anyway, I feel I should probably stop here. Others have gone much further than me, others have been braver. But there should be nothing ‘brave’ about asking legitimate scientific questions. As Richard Feynman said. ‘I would rather have questions that can’t be answered than answers that can’t be questioned.’

 

1: https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2019/jan/11/top-cancer-scientist-prof-martin-gore-dies-after-rare-reaction-to-yellow-fever-vaccination

2: Doctoring Data pp 228 – 9 ISBN 978-1-907797-46-0

3: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4718347/

4: https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2015/07/why-pandemic-flu-shot-caused-narcolepsy

5: http://vk.ovg.ox.ac.uk/vk/vaccine-development

6: https://www.kevinmd.com/blog/2018/11/why-demanding-a-randomized-controlled-trial-for-vaccines-is-disingenuous.html

7: https://bernardlown.wordpress.com/2012/03/10/mavericks-lonely-path-in-cardiology/

8: https://www.bmj.com/content/362/bmj.k3948

503 thoughts on “A second look at vaccination – answers that cannot be questioned

    1. Hannah Stelfox

      Thank you Dr. Kendrick. Please don’t give up on this topic. It is vital that we do not allow ourselves to be moved towards any mandated vaccine situation. Please look at Robert Kennedy in his latest Children’s Health Defence website where he also makes a rational explanation of why he feels vaccine safety must be questioned. Like Dr. Kendrick, he is astonished that the vaccine manufacturers are allowed to escape liability for damage caused by their product. My understanding on, for example, the HPV vaccine is that Japan (no mandated vaccines there) has removed that vaccine from any vaccination schedule for safety reasons. It feels side effects can be too dangerous. Now, if Japanese ‘experts’ feel this to be the case why do we think our experts are better informed without a very clear and open debate? Surely we are capable of looking at evidence and opinion from these different sources and making our own decisions. This seems to me to be a fundamental human right.
      The Board of Cochrane had a mass resignation involving the same issue. What is going on here? Who is funding independent review bodies? Well, has the Bill Gates’ Foundation donated £1M to Cochrane? We need to be careful here. Obviously pro-vaccine views still need to prove that the science behind them can withstand rigorous questioning and this should be for EVERY new vaccine as it should for every new drug. Also, let us ask who is benefiting from such a bonanza where mandating vaccines is allowed. Anyone notice how Merck’s shares shot through the roof in the recent American hysteria over measles?
      We also need to see any MP with any interest in private health companies/drug companies etc., donations from anyone who would benefit from mandating vaccines is not in the driving seat on any issue relating to vaccines as there is too big a potential for conflict of interest.
      I am not an anti-vaxxer, I am a cautious vaxxer as anyone with any sense should be and I certainly will never accept any ‘expert’ telling me what medical products or procedures I must subject my body to.
      Note, as Robert Kennedy points out, that the WHO organisation gets half its funding from private bodies including Pharma and the CDC owns 56 vaccine patents and buys and distributes $4.6 billion in vaccines annually. Still OK with them forcing these products on you or your family?
      We need to stand up to be counted here, quickly, before we sleep walk into a disaster. It is the attempt to shut down the debate on vaccine safety which should send alarm bells ringing. Every vaccine is different and every vaccine needs great scrutiny and if the evidence of efficacy is satisfactory then people should make their own decision as to whether they wish to use it. No question. For us to allow the debate to be reduced to being called ‘disinformation’ when such questions are raised is madness.

      Reply
      1. Gary Ogden

        Hannah Stelfox: Well spoken. Thank you. We have entered a dark period in human history. We thought that mandated medical treatment was forever banned after the doctor’s trial at Nuremburg, but we thought in vain. The very wealthy have taken control of most governments, and their sycophants are only too willing to follow orders. It would be horrid enough were they not targeting mainly helpless infants and children. They are amoral. They are unaccountable. They are evil.

      2. AhNotepad

        Gary, I am shocked at your description. “Evil” is rather over generous. They are not that nice.

      3. James DownUnder

        Would you buy an expensive new car, with NO (defects) warranty, un-enforceable performance claims, even poor design…and which may later proves to be unsafe at any speed ?
        (and NO refund)

        If so, I’ve got a great deal for you on a bridge, situated near an Opera House, truly a renovator’s dream.

  1. Justin Phillips

    Congrats Dr K a great post – rational and reasoned. My thoughts exactly.

    Justin Phillips phillips@mweb.co.za Mobile:  +27 82 547 2139 Landline (VOIP): 087 094 4580 Noordhoek, Cape Town, S.A.

    Reply
  2. srapp2013

    Love this quote from philosopher John Locke—do you read Kendrick? I get this newsletter every now and then and must say, I love the guy’s intelligence—hope u enjoy

    Sent from my iPad

    >

    Reply
  3. Laura

    I find this subject very difficult. As a baby I nearly died from Whooping cough, having been infected before I was vaccinated. Five years later I became very ill after a smallpox vaccination. It’s like Russian Roulette and I have no answers.

    Reply
    1. LA_Bob

      Laura,

      I think you made a very terse but important comment.

      Dr Kendrick cites the Hannah Polling story. Her vaccination “…significantly aggravated…[her predisposition] to deficits in energy metabolism, causing damage…”

      Okay, so here we have the making of an exclusionary criterion, meaning that if a patient can be found to meet the criterion, they shouldn’t get the vaccination.

      Do we have any examples of exclusionary criteria for other vaccinations? Yes!

      I am old enough that I was probably not vaccinated against anything before I was five or six, and most likely six. As far as I know, the only vaccinations I had were for polio (both the shot and the sugar) and DPT. Since then I’ve had tetanus booster shots, but that’s it.

      I had eczema, so I never had a smallpox vaccination. Why not? Eczema was known in 1960 to be a contraindication. In 2016, it was still a contraindication.

      From a Johns Hopkins website:

      https://www.hopkinsguides.com/hopkins/view/Johns_Hopkins_ABX_Guide/540182/all/Eczema_Vaccinatum__smallpox_vaccine_

      * Eczema is most common contraindication to [smallpox] vaccine and was most common cause of vaccine mortality in 1960s.
      * Best prevention of EV [Eczema Vaccinatum]: careful history to assess for current or prior hx of eczema/atopic dermatitis.
      * VIG is brutal due to large IM volume; IV form is in production
      * GREATEST RISKS: age < 1yr, active eczema, primary vaccination.

      Seems to me that if medicine knew six decades ago there was a good reason not to vaccinate someone with the allegedly most successful vaccine in history, medicine ought to consider the same might apply to any vaccine. I haven’t looked to see how many generally accepted exceptions to other vaccines there might be, but I suspect the number is small.

      So, what’s the problem with the vaccine debate? Apparently an epidemic of closed minds. Which means no effort at finding answers to the concerns your comment expressed: namely, who should be vaccinated, when, and why or why not?

      Isn’t that one of the important points of Dr Kendrick’s two posts?

      Reply
    2. Christina Phillips

      Hi Laura. Sounds like the whooping cough must have been scary for your parents. I think at least one partial answer to your conundrum is that whooping cough vaccine, along with mumps, is THE least efficacious vaccine. Horribly so. 100% of kids that got it earlier this year at one HS in CA were vaccinated against it, while zero of the unvaccinated (medically exempted kids) got it. There are still huge numbers of cases of WC (pertussis is shorter to write), in the US every year and studies show that the vaccine can make recipients of it asymptomatic while still passing it to others. The industry is scrambling to create an updated P component because its duration of efficaciousness is thought to be 1-2 years at this point. The assumption we make when weighing which is worse: the risk of harm from vaccines vs risk of harm from disease, is that we tend to assume that IF we get by WITHOUT harm (which itself can certainly be a long spectrum of degrees) the protection from the vaccine is a given. We assume that vaccination = no harm from that disease. There are many downsides even to a “successful” immunization. Natural immunity provides real and lasting protection for the herd, for the individual’s big picture immune system, for the really vulnerable demographic when it cones to Pertussis- which is babies. Mothers who have developed immunity through natural exposure extend passive immunity to their babies through nursing (and I think to a degree even without it, though I’m not sure about that). There is also the displacement that has happened between chicken pox to, now, shingles. There is the displacement of the viral strains covered by the HPV vaccine – to increased risk from others. There is the global assurance that poliomyelitis is being eradicated from the planet while, for all intents and purposes, the horrific symptoms (paralysis) we thought were just from that “bug” are at least as problematic in India now – with their extremely aggressive polio vaccination program – as they were here in T Roosevelt’s time.

      Reply
  4. Jennifer

    Thank you for this follow up, Dr Kendrick. I feel that previous responses have been taking us round and round the whole topic, without conclusions. Your response suggests that we are unlikely to get a satisfactory outcome as to the safety or otherwise of vaccination because of ethical research being almost impossible to do. But, if the public’s and medics’ experiences are not collected, or analysed, or publicised by the manufacturers, then we are never going to get anywhere near a conclusion. It will take a brave manufacturer to advertise such information, and the same goes for the medics who dare to step out of line. I do fear for the future of society, with the loss of control due to domination by big money. Sorry to seem so pessimistic.

    Reply
    1. Gary Ogden

      Jennifer: I share your pessimism. Nevertheless, we soldier on in educating the public. I do so every chance I get.

      Reply
      1. andrea burgener

        Thank-you and thank-you again, for always looking at actual facts and for seeking answers instead of deciding on them beforehand (such an amazing rarity amongst writers on these topics, that one might almost consider it eccentric!). You never have a knee-jerk reaction, you always put measured reason above ideology. How you’re still sane, given the lack of sense around you is quite incredible. Your thoughts on the vaccine issue should be handed out as compulsory reading, to assist people with rational and unbiased thinking, on any topic at all.

      2. Gary Ogden

        andrea burgener: You’re welcome. We the people will stop this madness. Must stop this madness. There are many fine, honorable people involved in science and Medicine, but they are not in charge, even in their own fields. We must support and honor these people, but it is not enough. We must refuse to allow governments to cause harm. This has become an intensely political issue in the U.S. The Democrat Party, of which I was a member for forty years, has taken on, as their cause célèbre, both global warming and forced vaccination. I weep and gnash my teeth. The only glimmer of hope I see with this Epstein affair is that only 29% of Americans now believe what their government says. They have lost control of the narrative of the truth of vaccine injury, of waning immunity, of real children in the many thousands needing lifetime care and special education services. A tsunami of them are aging out to adulthood, and there is no provision for them. This is why the media and online platforms are censoring anything questioning the official position on vaccines. Censorship always backfires, and the children cannot be hidden. There will be hell to pay when enough of the public realizes they’ve been duped.

    2. Joe

      To Jennifer:

      IMO, it won’t get done by the manufacturer or government.

      This can only be done by independent researchers. For example a group like the Cochrane Collabortion used to be before it was corrupted by The Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation.

      Reply
      1. elizabethhart

        Joe, Cochrane’s motto is “Trusted evidence. Informed decisions. Better health.”

        But in my long and bitter experience, Cochrane is a disaster area, not to be trusted, they are finished as far as I’m concerned.

        For some background, see below my rapid responses published on The BMJ, challenging Cochrane’s deeply conflicted systematic review of HPV vaccination.[1]

        – Cochrane HPV vaccine review severely compromised by conflicts of interest (1) 17 Sept 2018: https://www.bmj.com/content/362/bmj.k3472/rr-4

        – Cochrane HPV vaccine review severely compromised by conflicts of interest (2) 17 Sept 2018: https://www.bmj.com/content/362/bmj.k3472/rr-5

        – Conflicts of interest and objective evaluation of medical products 21 Sept 2018: https://www.bmj.com/content/362/bmj.k3966/rr-2

        – Cochrane HPV vaccination review – what about the CDC’s Lauri Markowitz’ undisclosed conflicts of interest? 5 Oct 2018: https://www.bmj.com/content/363/bmj.k4163/rr

        But who cares? Seems like that conflicted Cochrane HPV vaccination review still stands.

        Reference:
        1. Prophylactic vaccination against human papillomaviruses to prevent cervical cancer and its precursors: https://www.cochranelibrary.com/cdsr/doi/10.1002/14651858.CD009069.pub3/full?highlightAbstract=withdrawn%7Cvaccin%7Cvaccine%7Chpv

      2. anglosvizzera

        Joe, The Gates Foundation has stuck its fingers in to the European Medicines Agency too. We have a shred of hope though, through Dr Peter Gøtzsche’s recently-formed Institute for Scientific Freedom, assuming he can afford to keep it going. Whilst Gøtzsche is not against vaccines or mandation per se, he is all for safe vaccines and recognition of harm that can be done by them.

  5. Elaine

    I love it when you talk about vaccines because you are always so common-sensed that I value your opinion. It is a taboo subject to be sure and people will attack you if you question anything about vaccines. I believe all these people have various reasons why this is so but I have also seen people make “an about-face” after their child or a friend’s child has been injured OR if they have an open mind and do their own research.

    Reply
  6. Göran Sjöberg

    A daring input into the medical field indeed!

    Holy cows must not be slaughtered by “decent people”; only by the “untouchables”.

    I wonder among whom Suzanne Humphries now resides.

    Reply
  7. Judy B

    Bravo, Dr. K! We need more people speaking out against the dangerous rise of authoritarianism in medicine. Those pushing vaccines, statins, etc. should not be allowed to answer, “Because I said so.” to justify the meds/tests/procedures.

    Reply
  8. AhNotepad

    Thanks for another mind bender. It is certainly a concern that governments should be effectively punishing people who refuse to be injected with largely untested products that carry no liability for the producers in the event the products cause harm.

    If the Germans are preventing tens of thousands of deaths a year through vaccination, then a thousand severe complications and a hundred deaths or so, per year, may be a price worth paying? Discuss.

    How are they preventing tens of thousands (or even any) deaths. This has been discussed previously on this blog, no treatment prevents death, or saves lives. It only moves the end point. I am appalled that a medical treatment (vaccination) should be causing adverse life changing effects that are deemed acceptable because some highly questionable stastics are used to claim so much “good” is done. There is no absolute proof of this, as no adequate testing has been done.

    Antibiotics are now known to directly harm the microbiome (gut flora/fauna) and also some diseases are now resistant to all known antibiotics. Why should anyone think the same harms and resistance will not be associated with vaccines? They already have, as demonstrated by Andrew Wakefield et al.

    Reply
    1. Jerome Savage

      Mmmm. How can I get my gardening done with such fierce rational probing analytical stuff to digest ?

      Reply
    2. Joe

      To AhNotepad;

      The release of all liability for vaccine damage and deaths must be eliminated. That will require a lot of grass roots effort to get legislators to represent the people again and not just pharmaceutical companies and government agencies.

      Reply
      1. Gary Ogden

        Joe: You’re absolutely right, but it will never happen without large numbers of people massing in the streets. Our representatives, especially in the House, represent their funders, not the voters. Get them into court, and mandates will be finished.

      2. Jerome Savage

        Gary This brings to mind Robin Williams comment that “POLITICIANS SHOULD WEAR SPONSOR JACKETS LIKE NASCAR DRIVERS. THEN WE KNOW WHO OWNS THEM”

      3. Gary Ogden

        Jerome: Robin Williams is one of my favorites. Sadly, I think it was Medicine which destroyed him.

      4. Jerome Savage

        Thanks Gary,
        U hav managed to send me off exploring circumstances surrounding Robins demise. Very little linking pharma until I came across a piece by Dr. Gary G. Kohls which linked Remeron, Seroquel and an unknown anti-Parkinsonian drug suggesting the cocktail caused somnolence, despondency, desparation and depression. But what struck me most of all was a further piece that I chanced across –
        https://respectfulinsolence.com/2019/02/18/gary-kohls-md-lies-about-orac/
        that refers to the same “Gary G. Kohls, MD, a retired quack who decided to attack a hero of mine, Dr. Paul Offit, and me in a lazily written attack piece that relies on an old misattribution”
        “Of course, Dr. Kohls, being the lazy quack that he is….. ” “an anti-vaxer” and so on in an attack that was as vicious & contemptuous as is possible.
        A very nasty place out there in the medical world. We would like to think that Dr. K is ready for such attacks if the big pharma pushers head his direction.

      5. Gary Ogden

        Jerome: Yes, as far as I know, Orac, Respectful Insolence, and Skeptical Raptor, are all the same person. He is an actual physician, with a practice in Minnesota, I think, and as nasty as they come. His writing consists mainly of ad hominem attacks. If you’re interested, Tim Bolen has written about him (and everything is archived for easy access on the Bolen Report). Not my cup of tea as to politics, but a real warrior and ally for health freedom.

  9. Pearl

    Thank you for the vaccine posts. We need more people who are intelligently questioning them. You said what I say often “do proper testing! It will either prove or disprove your points.” No other industry is allowed to claim “because we said so” without being called snake oil pushers. Why are they? And it comes back to money, again….

    I am almost positively one of the vaccine damaged, but because it’s all taboo, I can get no rational answers, and I have no way to prove it. 99% odds I am, but the doctors don’t believe it “show me the proof!” Makes me crazy.

    Thank you for rational questions, and good discussion 🙂

    Reply
  10. sundancer55

    I was going to comment on the last couple of articles you’ve posted, but my “password” is not working. I just changed it a few months ago because I had the same damned problem. This is getting very irritating. Now I cannot even open my WordPress account to reset the password there (not that I want to reset it). Any suggestions about how to comment at your site???

    ​**************************
    “With phRMaceuticals, the first disaster is if you kill people;
    the second disaster is if you cure them.” – FDA/phRMa employee

    “The trouble with this country is that there are too many politicians who believe, with a conviction based on experience, that you can fool all of the people all of the time.” Franklin Pierce Adams

    “One has to wait less time to become a naturalized citizen than a veteran needs to wait to receive care from the VA!” The New York Times

    ________________________________

    Reply
  11. bluecat57

    If vaccines are safe and effective, and you are vaccinated, why do you care if someone else us not? Discuss.

    Reply
    1. anglosvizzera

      They would care on behalf of those that can’t be vaccinated (eg too young, immunocompromised etc) – so they guilt-trip everyone into vaccinating.

      Reply
    2. anita

      I agree bluecat57. I use this same argument time and again. I was born in 55, Canadian, never had a vaccine. Apparently the old “country” doctor thought they were unsafe. He didn’t change his mind when my brother came along 4 years later. My daughter was vaccinated. She has two serious auto immune diseases. Sure some people never have a reaction…but do they? Only time will tell. The truth needs to be exposed.

      Reply
  12. nodeadducks

    Thank you Dr Kendrick, this really needed saying. Who are the people who scream blue murder every time you, or I, or anybody, asks a question about the safety of vaccines?

    Reply
    1. Gary Ogden

      nedeadducks: Clearly some of them are people hired by public relations firms contracted by the CDC foundation to attack anyone who questions vaccine policy. Others are media editors, academics, or scientists who know who butters their bread. Not likely very many of them are concerned citizens voicing an opinion.

      Reply
    2. Judy B

      I got a nasty tirade from a doctor on KevinMD when I asked what the harm was in spreading out the vaccination schedule. I was called an”anti-Vader” and he said since I did not believe in vaccination, that I should contract all the terrible diseases. (Note, I only asked about extending the length of the schedule. There was nothing more in my comment…)

      Reply
      1. anglosvizzera

        Judy B, it’s crazy isn’t it? Even Dr Richard Halvorsen, who still provides vaccines for those who want them, advises spreading them out and delaying them. He is very concerned about the increasing numbers of vaccines appearing on the schedule, seemingly without any research into the consequences. Some doctors seem almost ‘religious’ about vaccines, their view based on nothing but what they’ve been ‘indoctrinated’ to believe!

      2. barovsky

        I read somewhere (on Dr Mercola’s site I think), that American children now get 18 vaccinations! This is madness I think. And there is of course the added complication of all the pesticides, industrial chemicals, air, water and food pollution and the icing on the cake, the myriad medicines that are now administered, some like my own, administered solely to counteract the negative effects of of the other medications I’m taking! When I asked my GP (who is very sympathetic) about the synergistic effects of this cocktail, she told me it’s impossible to evaluate, there are just too many combinations! It’s like the 3 body theory! No wonder we’re dying in increasing numbers of diseases that used to be quite rare.

        LIkewise my refusal to take statins (I did for 3 years before stopping). I asked her how do you differentiate between the impact of diesel particulates on my heart from NOT taking statins (assuming statins actually do what the propaganda asserts), again she said it’s impossible to untangle the mess.

        Ultimately, it points to the demise of industrial capitalism as a totally unviable system and us along with it. Oh, and I fogot to mention that global heating is leading to mutations in bacteria viruses to add the insanity. We get what we pay for it seems.

      3. chris c

        That’s something I was pondering. I had my first smallpox vaccination when I was too young to remember, but the polio and diptheria were done when we were years rather than months old (back in the fifties), Anyone else remember The Clinic with seats lined up all around the walls, we gradually moved down to the door to a room where several doctors/nurses wielded reusable syringes, dipping the needle in meths and flaming it off with a bunsen burner between victims, then every so often resharpening it with a grindstone?

        The strange one was the BCG (which I managed to avoid) which was done in our teens.and strangely has now been discontinued by the NHS. It was regarded as painful and unpleasant, yet in other countries it is done soon after birth. I wonder what the backstory is there.

        The modern schedule is frankly horrendous, multiple vaccines at a much younger age, yet they claim seemingly without the need for evidence that this is good for us.

      4. Jean Humphreys

        ” Anyone else remember The Clinic with seats lined up all around the walls, we gradually moved down to the door to a room where several doctors/nurses wielded reusable syringes, dipping the needle in meths and flaming it off with a bunsen burner between victims, then every so often resharpening it with a grindstone?”
        Yes, but in my case we were marched from school to the town hall, where we had to stand in line and could see what was coming. I broke away and locked myself in the loo. Parents were there and also my Aunt who worked there, and I refused to come out until I was promised chocolate and no jab.. (They slid the chicolate bar under the door.) I had whooping cough the following year – it was no big deal.

      5. janetgrovesart

        They came into junior schools (late forties) and put the fear of god in us. I can remember everyone wanting to be at the back of the queue but at the same tone envying those who had already gone in and come out again, some smug, some tearful. (I would have been the latter.) injections in those days really hurt unlike today with tiny disposable needles (a terrible waste)
        I think my jab was against diphtheria but I can’t remember what else. All our mothers were terrified of diphtheria and scarlet fever, though ‘ordinary’ childhood illnesses like measles, mumps, German measles and chickenpox were just accepted as a normal part of childhood and children were deliberately exposed if there was any going the rounds.
        How times change.

      6. janetgrovesart

        They came into junior schools (late forties) and put the fear of god in us. I can remember everyone wanting to be at the back of the queue but at the same time envying those who had already gone in and come out again, some smug, some tearful. (I would have been the latter.) injections in those days really hurt unlike today with tiny disposable needles (a terrible waste)
        I think my jab was against diphtheria but I can’t remember what else. All our mothers were terrified of diphtheria and scarlet fever, though ‘ordinary’ childhood illnesses like measles, mumps, German measles and chickenpox were just accepted as a normal part of childhood and children were deliberately exposed if there was any going the rounds.
        How times change.

      7. chris c

        The Town Hall! There’s posh now . . .and intimidating. Interesting how things are done in different places, the BCG and prior TB test were done in senior school, they commandeered a classroom and made us queue in the corridor.

        The Clinic was also where mother got my cod liver oil and orange juice, it was a standalone facility for childcare. In the seventies or eighties (I didn’t live there then) it was closed down and fell into disrepair, then in the nineties it was demolished and replaced with a private doctors’ surgery.

        Around the eighties two hospitals and a third in a nearby town were replaced by a modern hospital built on green belt land. They, and two huge mental hospitals which were closed due to “care in the community” all became sites of luxury executive housing. I wonder where the money went, presumably not to the NHS.

        Last I heard as I moved away again, they were going to demolish the new hospital, and another in an adjacent town, and build a newer and bigger one again on green belt land. Here is where all that money we pay for the NHS goes. Well that and vaccines and ineffective drugs. And massive salaries for the executives who live in the houses.

        My father and his brother would be turning in their graves, they worked for the NHS from its inception until they retired. Land deals were never part of the plan.

      8. chris c

        Pondering further in history, back in the day GPs generally worked from their houses, and did house calls. Some GPs worked as a team in an entire house, “Health Centres” appeared much later. Most of the work of the NHS was dealing with ill people.

        The Clinic was built probably after the war to cope with the “baby boom” and was the first facility to do “preventative care”.

        Nowadays most of the work of the NHS seems to be trying to find something wrong with healthy people so they can be prescribed something. one high “cholesterol” reading and you are on statins for life. Yet people still die, and generally suffer a lot first, just from different things than they might have suffered from if they were unmedicated. My symptoms were controlled by a bunch of the usual old fart drugs, but strangely they went away when I ate the exact opposite of what I was told – so commonplace as to be unremarkable. By the time she died at 95 my mother’s repeat prescriptions ran to three pages.

        There are now “epidemics” of obesity and metabolic diseases starting in childhood and likewise allergies, asthma, autism etc. which have replaced polio, diptheria, smallpox and now also measles, mumps and chickenpox.

        It seems for all the money spent all that is happening is rearranging the deckchairs on the Titanic. We are till suffering and dying, just from different things. The difference is the profit.

  13. Tom Welsh

    ‘… therefore it can be said, with little risk of error, that the association between modern vaccinations and serious neurological disorders is a true “urban myth”’.

    As a professional writer and editor, my attention immediately snapped to that little phrase: “with little risk of error”. Weasel words, as they are known in the trade. An escape route, in case anything should go wrong.

    Who would say, for instance, “Therefore it can be said, with little risk of error, that two plus two equals four”?

    Or “Therefore it can be said, with little risk of error, that plunging oneself into freezing water leads to hypothermia”?

    Notice also “… it can be said”. Notice that no one is elbowing to the front to say this. No, “it can be said”. By whom? No one in particular. And why “can” be said? I “can” say that the Moon is made of Gorgonzola… but it isn’t true.

    Reply
  14. Marjorie Daw

    Thanks Dr. K.

    The claim that vaccines are safe is simply not true. None of the vaccines given to children have ever been tested against a true placebo. They are tested out on healthy individuals but when they get to market are given to everyone, one day old infants, babies, the elderly, people with autoimmune diseases like asthma and diabetes and to pregnant women.

    Vaccination is a mandated medical procedures performed on healthy people to supposedly prevent an illness that they don’t have. Therefore you would think vaccine manufacturers would be held to the highest safety standards but that isn’t the case. Here Del Bigtree interviews a Merck insider who explains the lack of safety testing and why he has not vaccinated his own children.
    https://thehighwire.com/watch/

    Reply
      1. Martin Back

        Extracts from A Review of Factors Affecting Vaccine Preventable Disease in Japan

        “there are two kinds of vaccine systems in Japan, routine vaccination and voluntary vaccination. The government pays for routine vaccinations while families must pay for voluntary vaccinations.”

        Government pays for: H. influenzae type b (Hib), Pneumococcus (PCV), Diphtheria, Pertussis, Tetanus’, Polio (inactivated), Human papillomavirus (HPV), Measles, Rubella, Varicella, Tuberculosis (BCG), Japanese encephalitis

        Families pay for: Mumps, Hepatitis A, Hepatitis B, Rotavirus (oral), Influenza.

        “Japanese rates of routine vaccinations are among the highest in the world. For example, in 2013, the rate of vaccination with three doses of DTP in Japan was estimated to be >99.5%, compared with 94% in the United States. Despite prior challenges with rubella coverage, in 2013, 95% of eligible Japanese children reportedly received one dose of rubella vaccine compared with 91% in the United States.”

        “On the other hand, voluntary vaccines have lower rates of administration than routine vaccinations. In a Japanese survey conducted in the second half of 2011, only 53% of 18 month old children were reported to be vaccinated against Hib, 43% against pneumococcus, and 1.3% against hepatitis B.33 This compares with rates of 90%, 92% and 92% respectively for these vaccinations in the United States.”

        “A result of the lower rates of vaccination for voluntary vaccines is ongoing outbreaks of vaccine preventable diseases.”

        [Other factors discussed are the cost of voluntary vaccines, the vaccine schedule, no school requirements for vaccines, preference for subcutaneous administration, and low intention to vaccinate by Japanese parents.]

  15. Stan Calderwood

    An extremely enlightening article. As an engineer I get the rational for vaccination, and have tended to ignore evidence of their problems. Cow pox proved it centureis ago. My wife has challenged me on this – and she is a more analytical individual. Your blog makes clear unbiased sense of the issue and has changed my opinion – to a more informed and balanced one. Thank you.

    Reply
  16. David Howorth

    I think your comments about mitochondria and CFS/ME are a little out of date. Current research I think indicates that the energy-production problem of sufferers is ‘upstream’ of the mitochondria themselves. See the MEA site for a summary.

    As regards your position on vaccines, I have a lot of sympathy with it but feel you need to find some way to state your position more succintly/concretely. That is, there needs to be some proposal presented for a better way to proceed. The discovery/invention of the smallpox vaccine pretty much set a high bar for the positive case and many other vaccines clearly have very beneficial effects with limited negative consequences. So it’s a difficult battle. Better reporting of negative aspects would be a great improvement, as it would throughout science in general. But how to achieve that is a great unanswered puzzle.

    Reply
    1. Gary Ogden

      David Howorth: Concerning smallpox, read “Dissolving Illusions.” The actual history, rather than the modern myth.

      Reply
    2. anglosvizzera

      David Howorth – regarding CFS/ME following vaccination (often the HPV vaccine) there clearly is a need for further research as to the aetiology of this condition. You may have already come across Professor Chris Exley’s research into aluminium toxicity and, more recently, his warnings about the aluminium adjuvants in many vaccines, the HPV having a high level of aluminium in a ‘novel’ adjuvant that Merck patented but will not release to him for research. He has suggested to the parents of girls who have been affected in this way to try his high-silicon mineral water protocol to remove aluminium safely from the body and see what happens. He is on record as saying that he is consistently receiving emails from these parents telling him that the girls are ‘getting better’. One would think that as a (The) world expert in aluminium toxicity in living organisms that this kind of information would be a reason to investigate the aluminium adjuvants in more detail – and yet since he mentioned the possible link between aluminium adjuvants and autism, he has been labelled an “anti-vaxxer”, a “quack” etc and his funding has all but dried up.

      You say, “…many other vaccines clearly have very beneficial effects with limited negative consequences” but from what Dr Kendrick is saying in this blog post is how can anyone make such a statement?

      Who is taking notice of adverse reactions from vaccines when reported (and only 10% of them are, it is agreed) and how can you say that vaccines clearly have very beneficial effects?

      In some cases, paralytic polio for example, once the vaccine was introduced, the clinical diagnostic criteria were made more stringent so that many cases that would previously have been called ‘polio’ were suddenly ineligible. That made the vaccine appear very effective!

      With pertussis, many cases of prolonged cough have been misdiagnosed and eventually following a lab test have been found to be pertussis because doctors often assume that ‘it can’t be pertussis’ if a person has had a vaccination. We are now being told that the current acellular pertussis vaccine only ‘lasts’ for about 3 years or so.

      The mumps vaccine seems to ‘work’ for a few years but clearly wears off just when young adults are entering university as most outbreaks are appearing there, mostly in boys when it’s potentially more dangerous.

      The current push for mandatory vaccines appears to be mainly to do with the threat of measles. But measles clearly isn’t the ‘worst’ disease someone can get as we all had it as children, mostly without incident. And the only free vaccine for measles is the MMR, which is a combined vaccine of 3 viruses – and in nature, nobody ever gets sick from 3 viruses at the same time! So what is it about measles and not, say, diphtheria, pertussis, tetanus, meningitis, pneumococcus, Hib, HPV etc that is driving this quest? And where has scarlet fever gone? There was never a vaccine for that.

      Reply
      1. Gary Ogden

        anglosvizzera: There are still scarlet fever outbreaks, mostly in Asia, including one in Hong Kong in 2017. There was a vaccine developed, but proved too toxic to be used. It was trialled with nurses (doctors know better). A disease which went away from most of the world, all on its own, without the help of a vaccine.

      2. anglosvizzera

        Don123, I’m thinking you meant ‘lightning’ rather than ‘lightening’? Although either could potentially kill you!

      3. Gary Ogden

        Sasha: I just found out there is a subway ticket machine in Russia which will give you a free ticket if you can do thirty squats. I did eighty this morning. My daughter and I are ready to go! Only during the warm season, though.

      4. Sasha

        Gary: It’s possible. There’s a big campaign of healthy lifestyles underway in Russia. I see ads on TV and in subway: classes for yoga, dancing, fitness in parks and community centers. Most of them are free, I believe. I think it possibly comes as a legacy of Soviet system, Soviet Union had a huge sports program completely state subsidized. I grew up with sports during that time and it was one of the best things that happened to me.

        If you do come, let me know, I am in Moscow. It will be an honor to meet you guys. My email is sasha.kremer (at) yahoo (dot) com

    3. Arthur Jones

      Hi David; I (like you) had always believed what I was told: smallpox vaccines were good. However reading Suzanne Humphries’ book (“Dissolving Illusions”) provides facts; and makes one question the issue; in her biography, she describes her journey from diligent and highly read and practiced nephrologist (kidney doctor) to researching vaccines.

      Reply
  17. Tom Welsh

    “If science has any purpose it is to seek the truth…”

    I quite agree… as I believe any reasonable person of good will must.

    But for a contrasting view of reality, see Bruce Charlton’s slim volume “Not Even Trying”, a well-reasoned lament about the decease of real science worldwide. He warns that most of today’s “scientists” and researchers have settled for safe mediocrity, and are more interested in career progress than anything as airy-fairy as “truth”.

    It seems that Pontius Pilate was just a little ahead of his time.

    Reply
  18. Tom Welsh

    ‘This means looking at whether the vaccine generates a level of immunity that would prevent disease, and provides evidence that the vaccine can actually reduce the number of cases.’

    More revealing weasel words.

    ‘…a level of immunity that would prevent disease…’

    “Would”? would prevent disease if what? Why write “would”? Surely it either does prevent disease or it doesn’t? Unless of course that is unknown…

    And again: “… evidence that the vaccine can actually reduce the number of cases”. Why not “…does reduce the number of cases…”?

    Do you feel – as I do – that the text was drawn up by a panel of very clever, rather dishonest lawyers?

    Reply
    1. Afifah

      The actual cases are all you can go on, of any disease, not the absence of cases. They are not a thing! The authorities can never say that ‘20,000 cases of measles have been prevented’. This can never be known. All one can know is ‘this is a case of this disease’ or ‘this condition – be it narcolepsy or death – occurred following a vaccination’. Those are the real things, the rest is smoke and mirrors.

      Reply
  19. Tom Welsh

    “A true efficacy study does not simply look at a ‘surrogate’ marker”.

    …Such as cholesterol…

    Reply
  20. Hans

    I disagree that your aversion to compel people to undergo possibly dangerous medical procedures puts you “very much on the radical libertarian end of the spectrum.” But then that’s probably because I’m a “radical” myself and simply can’t see my own madness. Ho ho.
    “Nineteen-Eighty Four” (with John Hurt) was recently on my TV (again). It now makes me wonder: Might we get to a world like that simply because of a traumatic war… or gradually, little by little without a war – after we stop questioning any more decisions made for us.
    Resisting the loss of liberty takes a lot of effort these days just to keep what one has at the moment.
    “here, you see, it takes all the running you can do, to keep in the same place.”

    Reply
  21. Greg Hill

    If the powers that be had one iota of interest in investigating possible problems with vaccines, the so-called “moral argument” against leaving unvaccinated children susceptible to disease could easy be worked around simply by doing a long term placebo controlled trial that was officially focused on the safety and efficacy not of the vaccines themselves but on the ideal schedule for vaccine administration. One group would receive all of the currently recommended vaccines on the currently recommended schedule. For any vaccines that are administered just once, one group would receive the vaccine on the current schedule while the other would receive a true saline solution placebo, then six months or a year later the group that got the vaccine the first time would get the placebo, while the group that got the placebo the first time would get the real vaccine. For all of the multi-dose vaccines, one additional “vaccination” dose could be added to the schedule with half of the subjects receiving the placebo as the first dose only, and the other half receiving a the placebo as the last dose only. All of the subjects would receive all of the doses of all the same vaccines, just on slightly modified schedules. Every subject would be carefully monitored for many years looking for any patterns of differences in the overall health of the subjects. It’s pretty predictable what the results would be like, with those who got vaccines on a delayed schedule staying overall healthier, longer. That’s precisely why both the vaccine manufactures and their lackeys in governmental psdudo-regulatory agencies will fight it tooth and nail to prevent it from ever being done. And yes, indeed, I am serving here as a “conspiracy theorist,” which doesn’t imply that a conspiracy doesn’t exist or at least cannot be proven. The conspiracy does in fact exist, and quite a number of whistle-blowers can and already have testified to that fact.

    Reply
    1. anglosvizzera

      Dr Paul Thomas, a paediatrician practising in Portland, Oregon, offers a ‘vaccine-friendly’ schedule. As a result he states that none of his patients have developed regressive autism since its introduction – but he’s constantly being criticised for this, despite the fact that his patients clearly are benefiting from it.

      Here’s his schedule with information for parents to help them decide the risks versus the benefits of individual vaccines – http://www.mountainspringhealth.com/site/1063/Safari.pdf

      Reply
      1. Justin

        He’s still injecting proven neurotoxins into children on a regular basis and therefore by definition causing brain and immunological damage – in any decent society with doctors capable of thinking for themselves that would be considered a crime against humanity

      2. Gary Ogden

        Justin: Dr. Paul Thomas is on our team. His views of vaccination have evolved over time, and he is truly one of the good guys.

      3. anglosvizzera

        Justin – the laws about vaccines in the US are very strict in some states, so many paediatricians have little choice but to toe the line or lose their jobs. Dr Thomas is providing information to parents so that they can decide what they want to do – that way he isn’t acting against vaccinations but many of his patients don’t receive vaccines if their parents choose not to give them.

        By the way, I agree with you about these toxins being injected that cannot be good for one’s health, but the way things are at the moment, having informed choice is the best we can be offered. Those who still want vaccines mostly want safe vaccines and clearly they are not safe at present. And it’s debatable how effective in preventing disease they really are – statistics are thrown at us that include data from places in the world where children are malnourished and brought up in less than hygienic conditions, purely to scare the public into vaccinating. Soon there will be none of us left who had measles etc as a rite of passage with no consequences to be able to reassure parents that it’s not the end of the world to catch the usual childhood illnesses.

        For the record, my 2 youngest children were completely unvaccinated and were perfectly healthy, but as adults had to have the MMR to work in the NHS with patients. They were both also offered the Hep B vaccine; one just took it without question and the other asked my opinion and then we found she could sign a waiver so that she didn’t need to have it. It’s difficult…

    2. David Bailey

      Greg,

      I think that is known as a cross-over study, and I have seen such studies severely criticised. Any immunity from the real vaccine might (or might not) confuse the placebo cycle – and I’d imagine ‘looking for patterns’ would let the organisation with the deepest pockets win!

      I’d be happy to take part in a placebo controlled trial to test the flu vaccine. I’ll bet many parents would be willing to participate in a similar test for vaccination against the relatively mild diseases.

      Reply
      1. AhNotepad

        I would never take place in a placebo controlled study. The risk of getting some evil concoction the manufacturers won’t test poperly, or at all, is not worth the risk.

  22. HotScot

    Malcolm

    Thank you for your contribution to the question of vaccinations.

    To be honest, up until relatively recently I have never even been aware of the dispute surrounding them.

    I became more aware of the debate when my now 24 year old daughter contracted Narcolepsy and Cataplexy (the specific condition associated with Narcolepsy that causes muscle weakness in moments of emotion) in secondary school when she was about 16 years old.

    Naturally, it coincided roughly with the 2009 Pandemrix vaccination, the only problem is, she was never vaccinated, to our knowledge, with Pandermix or any other flue vaccination.

    We can’t, of course, draw any other conclusion other than it was a purely coincidental occurrence, but what an extraordinary coincidence that an otherwise healthy young lady fell foul of this terrible condition.

    And be in no doubt, it is an extraordinarily debilitation condition. For the benefit of anyone else reading this, it is, in my clumsy explanation, a malfunction of the central nervous system that causes it to attack a vital protein which regulates sleep, mistaking it for a threat.

    It is such a rare condition that there are few, if any condition specific medications to deal with it. My daughters Consultant told us when we first visited him that he has to experiment on patients with drugs he ‘robs’ from other conditions.

    The medications he is forced to utilise come with severe side effects, short and long term heart conditions, digestive conditions, anxiety conditions etc.

    She was taken for a sleep study overnight into Kings College London. Now, as it was explained to this layman, a normal period of transition from drowsiness at bedtime, to deep sleep for non Narcoleptics is perhaps 10 to 20 minutes, my daughter was timed at 10 seconds. Which to many of us sounds bliss, but then she is likely to wake 10 minutes later in a dream state, not knowing what’s real and what’s not, feeling her duvet pressing her into her mattress, restricting her ability to both breathe and physically move. She is incapable of throwing back the covers and jumping out of bed, she is frozen in a terrifying, indeterminate period in time. This can happen multiple times a night, and she has never gotten used to it.

    My daughter is judged to be, on a scale of one to ten, about five in her level of severity of the condition. Can you imagine what the effects might be were she afflicted, as some are, at the extreme end of the spectrum?

    However, the condition is accompanied by Cataplexy, a neurological condition associated with Narcolepsy. It causes her to literally slump into her chair if she experiences heightened emotions, like a good joke or moments of grief. It seems largely untreated by the medications available as the overriding concern is for the main condition, Narcolepsy.

    Her mid teenage to mid twenties life has been one of constant experimentation with medication. Some work, some don’t. She experiences mood swings, borderline depression, almost hysterical elation and, more often that not, a drifting gently between the two on any given day.

    In my research of the subject I was surprised to find that some medical professionals consider the effects of Narcolepsy to be more profound than even epilepsy, and in my personal experience epilepsy is far less intrusive on a life that Narcolepsy.

    My neighbour has suffered from epilepsy for much of the 20 years of our acquaintance. It was concerning at first because a he was typically cavalier about it and refused to acknowledge it. Following a number of seizures he eventually accepted medication and has not had a seizure in 10 years or so, he sleeps well, conducts day to day life normally and is completely free of symptoms. His daughter was diagnosed with epilepsy ten years ago or so and is equally stable whilst sticking to her medication.

    To date and into the foreseeable future, my daughter will always be an ongoing experiment into Narcolepsy. As her consultant put it, she is in every respect, “a classic Narcoleptic.”

    What really puzzles me is that, whilst I was at Primary School, through to Secondary School in the mid 60’s mid 70’s, onto a short career in the Police, when I left in 1987, I think I might have encountered an epileptic, knowingly, once in all that time. And I’m even doubtful of that.

    Now, as a child, I was given a polio vaccine on a sugar lump I believe. I remember having measles around 1960 when I was probably 3 – 5 years old and in the 1970’s I was given a BCG (?) jab which got infected, erupted, and a school friend and I were banished from a Chemistry class to the chemicals cupboard (!) with lots of cotton wool and a big plaster.

    Around 1999, in my 40’s, I contracted Chicken Pox from my infant daughter. It didn’t occurred to me I hadn’t had it before and when I eventually visited my doctor he told me had I turned up sooner he would have hospitalised me. (The story of the dawning realisation I had the condition is worthy of a Tom & Jerry Cartoon. I was forced to abandon a business trip and returned home to a very uncomfortable night at home. The next day my wife was at work and I went for a hot bath to ease the aches and pains, which evidently coincided with/aggravated the condition because as I sat in the bath I watched as, one after the other, in quick succession, little red spots sprouted all over my body, ping, ping, ping…..still a good after dinner yarn!)

    However, all yarns aside, I now look at western culture in general and see our youth almost universally suffering from one condition or another.

    And I ask myself, why didn’t I contract anything when I was a 15 year old schoolboy, drinking milk literally straight from the cow, no pasteurisation or any treatment, when I was getting up at 4am to deliver the stuff to doorsteps across Lenzie, from Gadloch Farm.

    Why, despite my clinical obesity and continuing beer consumption, am I seemingly healthier than much of the youth of today? Which isn’t quite true as I see two subsets of conditions:

    1) The deprived (note not poverty stricken, no such thing in the UK in my opinion) who aren’t bothered about diet or exercise, but who don’t spend most of their lives in a car, and;

    2) The wealthy middle class who seemingly obsess about everything, including the latest car.

    And sorry for the rant’ish post, I didn’t mean it to be like that, but science is not presenting itself much better than religion did in the middle ages.

    All those burning questions that were supposed to be answered, betrayed by the peer review validation process the Lancet tells us fails replication 50% of the time (Bayer asses it as 75% of the time) and yet peer review is still trotted out as the gold standard of assessment!? I suspect even the Motor Car industry, for all it’s faults, has a better track record of reliability than 50%.

    Can it be true that condition diagnosis is outstripping treatment, when in the past the condition didn’t seem to exist in the first place, or, other than in the most severe of cases, people just got on with their lives and adapted to their condition without complaint?

    I don’t know. Are vaccinations failing us? Perhaps not in the way presented by the rabid antivaxxers, but something is going wrong with science generally isn’t it?

    And whilst Theresa May chose to chuck £1tn at Climate Change (sorry, it had to be mentioned) we understand no more about our climate system than we do about the human body. Why couldn’t she have chucked most of that money into sceptical medical science to test the robustness of our knowledge of accepted medical science, instead of wasting it on a subject we have no control over?

    Strange times indeed.

    Reply
    1. Justin

      “rabbid anti-vaxer” – someone concerned about injecting proven neurtoxins that have been shown to cause severe brain damage and death into children

      Reply
    2. chris c

      I honestly don’t know if it would help your daughter’s condition, but a ketogenic diet shows improvements in epilepsy and other “mental” illnesses. (It might help with your obesity also)

      Here’s a paper I recently picked up from another blog

      https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3321471/pdf/fphar-03-00059.pdf

      We evolved to be able to switch seamlessly between glucose and fats/ketones for energy but modern high carb low fat diets producing high insulin levels block the ability to switch away from glucose. Severely cutting the carbs (I do about 50g/day, others do less) keeping a good level of protein and a high level of fat, preferably NOT industrially produced Omega 6 seed oils) may help – the fat may not be so important if you have a large amount of body fat to burn). This may not help but might be worth a trial.

      Reply
    3. Anna M

      Hot Scot,

      Considering its success with epilepsy (some of whose victims are far less functional than your friend) and considering the neuroprotective effects and the way it promotes homeostasis of all sorts throughout the body, I would suggest for your daughter CBD and probably also regular cannabis oil.

      Reply
    4. Don132

      Sounds perhaps like some symptoms that have occurred from aluminum adjuvant.
      https://www.cochranelibrary.com/cdsr/doi/10.1002/14651858.CD012805/full

      Exley, the aluminum expert, has said that aluminum can be removed by silica in water, but not, as his experiments showed, by silica supplements. Fiji water is high in silica and seems readily available; also Volvic and Spritzer waters.

      “… only silicon-rich mineral waters, where
      the silicon content is above 30 mg/L or ppm when
      stated as ‘silica’* or 14 mg/L or ppm when stated as
      ‘silicon’ or ‘silicic acid’ (sometimes written as OSA,
      orthosilicic acid), will help to remove aluminium
      from the body.”

      Reply
  23. Tantan

    Thank yuo, Dr Kendrick. It is articles like this one, and people like yourself, that restore my faith in humanity. A little.

    Reply
  24. anglosvizzera

    Thank you Dr Kendrick for continuing this discussion. There were a number of people on the previous blog post that complained that you’d strayed off course from CVD.

    Maybe they are of an age where they think it doesn’t matter to them. But those people really should be interested in the subject of vaccination because if, say, the flu vaccine or the shingles vaccine become mandatory for the elderly they will need to know the risks versus the benefits (if any!), not that they’d be able to refuse them.

    They will need to be aware of the recent connections made between Alzheimer’s Disease and aluminium (which is in many vaccines) if they wish to live to a healthy old age – it won’t be much use ensuring they don’t suffer from CVD if they become demented and a burden on their family or society in general.

    If they have grandchildren, they may be concerned about the future generations and the escalating schedule of vaccines that appears to be happening without any concern as to harm, that is clearly a problem for some. The increasing burden of children and young adults with ‘autism-like’ symptoms will be impossible to deal with if it continues at the present rate, not to mention other conditions that appear to be related to vaccine-damage.

    As a GP, you have a right to enlighten yourself about other medical interventions and not just concentrate on CVD, and subsequently impart this information to the likes of us – and I, for one, am very grateful for your professional opinion on this divisive subject.

    Reply
    1. Don132

      “… only silicon-rich mineral waters, where
      the silicon content is above 30 mg/L or ppm when
      stated as ‘silica’* or 14 mg/L or ppm when stated as
      ‘silicon’ or ‘silicic acid’ (sometimes written as OSA,
      orthosilicic acid), will help to remove aluminium
      from the body.”

      That would be Fiji, Volvic, and Spritzer waters.

      Silica supplements will NOT do the trick.

      I repeat this post as it’s important, and comes from a poster on aluminum by Christopher Exley.

      Reply
  25. anglosvizzera

    Just had a weird experience – I tried to post a link to this on Facebook, but when I wrote any text to go with the post, Facebook didn’t allow it to show up on my home page or news feed! Seemed only to work without the text…strange things are afoot…

    Reply
    1. Deborah

      I had a similar experience with the previous blog – it would not post! I agree, big brother stuff.

      Reply
  26. Joe

    A great book on this topic is:

    Jabbed: How the Vaccine Industry, Medical Establishment, and Government Stick It to You and Your Family

    Be forewarned! It will make you very mad.

    Reply
  27. JohnQPublic

    Thank you Dr. Kendrick for being brave and writing insightful articles on vaccination. Hopefully you will not see efforts to censor your blog, as is happening in the US.

    We are seeing those in our Congress promoting censorship in violation of their oath of office. Look to history to recall the words of the late President John F. Kennedy on the issue of censorship in a 1962 speech, ironically from the very same Senate HELP committee, (Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions), now being used as a platform to call for censorship, when he extolled the bedrock of American principles stating:

    “We are not afraid to entrust the American people with unpleasant facts, foreign ideas, alien philosophies, and competitive values. For a nation that is afraid to let its people judge the truth and falsehood in an open market is a nation that is afraid of its people.” This applies to all nations.

    As a retired scientist, I have been studying the issue of vaccination for over four years and as others have written I have not been able to find studies that show the benefits outweighed the risks. I recommend to readers the following books and articles on vaccination, especially the history that many do not see in the mainstream media. Highly recommended is “Dissolving Illusion, Disease, Vaccines, and the Forgotten History”, by Dr. Suzanne Humphries, MD, and Roman Bystrianyk (2013), which includes a wealth of references that one can check the sources. One can learn the failures of the disastrous smallpox vaccine and the Leicester City method in the mid 1880’s of treating smallpox, which was first rejection of mandatory vaccination, then confinement of the stricken patient, followed by hydration and nutrition. The patient’s home was then disinfected. For detailed information read “Leicester: Sanitation versus Vaccination. Its Vital Statistics Compared With Those Of Other Towns, The Army, Navy, Japan, And England And Wales”, by J. T. Biggs, J.P., Member of the Leicester Town Council, and of its Sanitary Committee, for over Twenty-Two Years, published in 1912. Also, “Horrors of Vaccination Exposed and Illustrated”, by Chas M. Higgins, (1920); “Every Second Child”, by Dr. Archie Kalokierinos, (Australia 1974), and “Vaccines, Autoimmunity, and the Changing Nature of Childhood Illness”, by Thomas Cowan, MD, explaining how vaccines turn the immune system upside down.

    Reply
  28. Shelley Cole Giebel, MD

    On Mon, Jul 29, 2019 at 2:23 PM Dr. Malcolm Kendrick wrote:

    > Dr. Malcolm Kendrick posted: “29th July 2019 ‘No man can be forced to be > healthful, whether he will or not. In a free society, individuals must > judge for themselves what information they choose to heed and what they > ignore.’ John Locke. ‘A letter concerning Toleration’ Here, I ” >

    Reply
  29. Lynn W.

    Thank-you Dr K for your continued bravery. Since the passing in the U.S. of the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act in 1986 (eliminating vaccine manufacturers from financial liability due to vaccine injury), over $4 billion in USD has been paid out to claimants in “Vaccine Court”. The CDC owns numerous patents on vaccines/adjuvants and makes substantial income from their use. The CDC vaccine schedule is now upwards of 70 doses for 16 (19? I’ve lost count) diseases from birth to 18 years. More are in the pipeline. Our children have never been sicker: auto-immunity, asthma, allergy, autism, ADHD. This must be looked at, is there a causation? The U.S. Supreme Court has ruled vaccines are “unavoidably unsafe.” Read vaccine inserts. Take a look at the ingredients being injected in to your child’s veins, Weigh the possible benefits to the known risks. Talk to a mother who has seen her child suffer, sometimes permanently, after receiving a vaccination or multiple vaccinations after a visit to the pediatrician. Censoring content critical of vaccines is increasing on social media, by WordPress, amazon taking books questioning vaccines off their site, “Vaxxed” the movie being pulled from Vimeo….. What are we seeing here? Open, honest scientific inquiry on an issue effecting millions of concerned citizens? No. Name calling and marginalizing of anyone questioning the status quo. Many states in the U.S. have passed or are considering bills that mandate vaccines for school attendance, remove religious exemptions, even medical exemptions. We must have medical freedom.

    Reply
    1. Jerome Savage

      Lyn. According to Donna Black commenting on this page “the UK government recognises that vaccine damage certainly occurs as they have a page where you can claim £120,000 for it” Not widely known apparently.
      https://www.gov.uk/vaccine-damage-payment
      Re your own comment re vaccine manufacturers removed from financial liability due to vaccine injury, “and over $4 billion in USD has been paid out to claimants in “Vaccine Court””, am interested in knowing who takes the hit for the $4 billion + ?

      Reply
      1. anglosvizzera

        Jerome, in the US each vaccine sold has a small ‘tax’ applied to it, which funds the ‘Vaccine Court’ – so they have plenty of money available although make life very difficult for anyone who tries to claim…

      2. anglosvizzera

        Jerome, I posted something in reply to Donna Black’s comment about the UK vaccine damage payment. It comes with strings attached:

        “Donna, even when people know about this, they are often unable to claim because their child was under 2 years of age, thus making them ineligible instantly!

        “Time limits on making a claim
        “You can only claim for a child once they are 2 years old.

        “To claim for an adult, apply by whichever is the latest of the following dates:

        “on or before their 21st birthday (or if they’ve died, the date they would have reached 21)
        within 6 years of the vaccination”

        If they are old enough, there has to be proof that they are more than 60% ‘disabled’ as a result of the vaccine:

        “Disablement is worked out as a percentage, and ‘severe disablement’ means at least 60% disabled.

        “This could be a mental or physical disablement and will be based on medical evidence from the doctors or hospitals involved in your treatment.”

        And then you have to have ‘proof’ that it was actually the vaccine that caused the problems….”

      3. Gary Ogden

        Jerome Savage: The taxpayers, of course. Under the NCVIA of 1986, the liability for vaccine injury has been transferred from the manufacturers to the taxpayers via a $0.75 surcharge on every vaccine purchased. Nevertheless, since fewer than 1% of vaccine injuries are reported, fewer still of the victims are made aware of the compensation system, and only a fraction of those claims are successful in Vaccine Court, only a minuscule percent of actual injuries receive compensation. For serious injuries, for most people, you’re just on your own. The CDC purchases, with taxpayer dollars, about half the production run of vaccines.

      4. Jerome Savage

        Much appreciated Anglosv & Gary
        Fascinating but troubling stuff. Though
        “over $4 billion in USD”, “paid out to claimants in “Vaccine Court””” is not to be sneezed at, even over a number of years. As a percentage of overall sales it may be quite small. We might presume if there was 100% reporting we would be looking at $400 billion! Mmm. Surprised the legal eagles don’t identify an opportunity here !

      5. Gary Ogden

        Jerome Savage: Yes, if all injuries were reported and compensated, the bill would be in the $400-$600 billion range, every penny paid by taxpayers. An exceedingly difficult and time-consuming process. If it was lucrative for attorneys, they’d on it like a chicken on a June bug. In addition, most doctors have no training or inclination to note vaccine injury, and most have never heard of the compensation system. It is not publicized. A good book about this sordid mess is Wayne Rohde’s “The Vaccine Court.”

      6. Brian Steere

        But as you seem to indicate – it is no court so much as body given jurisdiction.
        If vaccine makers could be sued for damages in the same way as pharma then everything would be very different.
        Imagine if other corporations were given immunity from risk – like banking or the Military conglomerates inciting war on spurious and invented ‘intelligence’ – what would the world come to!
        R Kennedy Jr seems to me a rare example of someone from the ‘elite’ level standing up and sticking his neck out for ordinary people’s right to fundamental rights and freedoms set against huge financial interests in denying them. He is very measured in his approach and communications but also very able to mount significant rafts of challenge in a language that is legally binding.

      7. Jerome Savage

        Friends son was diagnosed with autism 3 years ago when child was 11. Low on spectrum apparently & as has child of a work colleague. Not something i was terribly familiar with in the past. Seems to be an assault on kids today, not just from vaccines but also sugary & processed foods, obesity levels growing exponentially, insufficient exercise (If any!) with resulting poor coordination & fitness.. A running coach spoke to me Sundat last of much reduced physical capacity among kids presented to him for coaching in recent years. Very noticible by all accounts. Professor Niall moyna is scathing of the drug companies’ attempts to take advantage of this new phenomenon. He speaks of stone age genes in context of space age technology. Exercise is absolutely crucial.

  30. elizabethhart

    Malcolm, you refer to the sad case of Professor Martin Gore who died after a yellow fever vaccination. You note the report in The Guardian[1] was careful to tone down criticism of vaccines, and that the words ’caused by’ were carefully avoided.

    There is also the case of another high profile individual, Malcolm Brabant, a BBC journalist who suffered adversely after yellow fever vaccination, see: ‘How a jab plunged my life into madness’: https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/11439622/How-a-jab-plunged-my-life-into-madness.html

    The reluctance to acknowledge adverse events after vaccination results in the ‘correlation is not causation’ gambit, where any suggestion that a vaccination might have caused a subsequent medical problem is deflected. Who knows how many health problems that may have been caused by or exacerbated by vaccination are going under the radar because adverse events after vaccination are not being recognised and reported?

    My interest in vaccination started back in late 2008 when one of my dogs became very ill after annual modified live virus and aluminium-adjuvanted vaccine products. This set me off investigating what I subsequently discovered was gross over-vaccination of pets, see for example this report: ‘Vets accused of over-vaccinating pets’ ABC, August 2010: https://www.abc.net.au/news/2010-08-18/vets-accused-of-over-vaccinating-pets/949038

    Of course I faced opposition to my strong suspicion that my dog’s illness and death were the result of recent over-vaccination, but I pressed on and challenged the Australian Veterinary Association and the (industry-funded) regulator of pet vaccine products, the Australian Pesticides and Veterinary Medicines Authority, and achieved some success in bringing attention to this subject. It’s a long story, but more information is on this webpage: https://over-vaccination.net/questionable-vaccines/pet-vax/ (This page is a few years old now, more recently I’m focusing on gross over-vaccination of humans: https://over-vaccination.net/)

    It’s acknowledged that adverse events after medical products are under-reported, e.g. the Australian regulator of medical products, the (industry-funded) Therapeutic Goods Administration, notes that: “Adverse events from consumers and health professionals to the TGA are voluntary, so there is under-reporting by these groups of adverse events related to therapeutic goods in Australia. This is the same around the world.”[2]

    Also consider the example of pet vaccination, i.e. the WSAVA dog and cat vaccination guidelines group (VGG) recognises “that there is gross under-reporting of vaccine-associated adverse events, because of the passive nature of reporting schemes, which impedes knowledge of the ongoing safety of these products [EB4].” The VGG also notes: “If a particular adverse event is well documented, reporting serves to provide a baseline against which future reports can be compared. In addition, reported adverse events can lead to detection of previously unrecognized reactions, detection of increases in known reactions, recognition of risk factors associated with reactions, identification of vaccine lots with unusual events or higher numbers of adverse events, and can further stimulate clinical, epidemiological or laboratory studies. Therefore, veterinarians are encouraged to report any clinically significant adverse event occurring during or after administration of any licensed vaccine. Reporting a vaccine adverse event is not an indictment against a particular vaccine; it facilitates review of temporally associated conditions and adds to the safety database of the product.”[3]

    Just consider that detailed statement from dog and cat vaccination guidelines, with its emphasis on reporting adverse events after vaccination and adding to “the safety database of the product”. This is an ideal which I suggest is NOT being pursued in either human or companion animal vaccination.

    It seems to me the current hostility against citizens questioning vaccine safety or vaccination policy in any way is all about defending vaccination dogma and protecting growing vaccine markets. Too many parties across the board from vaccine manufacturers, academics, public health departments, NGOs, doctors, medical journals, politicians, media, coercive vaccination lobby groups and bloggers and others are on-board in protecting this lucrative juggernaut, and shutting down dissent.

    How do we achieve transparency and accountability for vaccination policy against this powerful and highly conflicted status quo?

    References:
    1. Top cancer scientist dies after yellow fever vaccination. The Guardian, 12 January 2019: https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2019/jan/11/top-cancer-scientist-prof-martin-gore-dies-after-rare-reaction-to-yellow-fever-vaccination
    2. About the DAEN – medicines (Database of Adverse Event Notifications): https://www.tga.gov.au/about-daen-medicines
    3. Guidelines for the Vaccination of Dogs and Cats, compiled by the Vaccination Guidelines Group (VGG) of the World Small Animal Veterinary Association (WSAVA). Journal of Small Animal Practice. Vol. 57. January 2016: https://www.wsava.org/WSAVA/media/Documents/Guidelines/WSAVA-Vaccination-Guidelines-2015.pdf *Caveat: The WSAVA dog and cat vaccination guidelines are sponsored by a vaccine manufacturer (originally Intervet Schering Plough, more recently MSD Animal Health). Guidelines sponsored by industry are compromised, and in my opinion the WSAVA guidelines still contain ambiguous information in regards to dog and cat vaccination. However, they remain useful for this discussion.

    Reply
    1. chris c

      I nearly didn’t read the Guardian piece when I saw it was by Sarah Boselely.

      This reminds me a bit of the antimalarial, mefloquin? A small number of adverse reactions including “mental” symptoms. Obviously most people are unaffected but for the ones that are it can be life-destroying. What is the difference?

      Reply
  31. JDPatten

    “There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies, and statistics.” (American wisdom!)

    I’m taking a heavy-duty anti-arrhythmic medication. Meds all have their particular side effects, right? So, when it seemed to me that I was not sleeping well over a period of time roughly coinciding with the start of the med, I asked my doc about it.
    It seems that four percent of the people on this med reported sleep issues.
    I thought, “Damn! Just my luck that I find myself in this little cohort of drug damage.”
    Then I thought, “Wait a minute. Looking at all my friends and relations in my age group (70ish) I see very few without sleep issues. It turns out that this nasty med is actually beneficial for a good night’s sleep! Only 4% excepted.”
    And then I thought, “Yeah right. Nobody knows thing one about this issue.”

    Always remember: Association does not mean causation. It’s often very dicey to discern the difference.

    Reply
    1. Gary Ogden

      JDPatten: Have you tried citrulline malate? It seems to have improved my sleep. Also, early morning sun exposure helps to set the sleep/wake cycle.

      Reply
      1. Jean Humphreys

        That article interested me, since it provided a simple explanation for why I had Chicken Pox twice. I don’t remember chicken pox, but my Mother said I had it. I do remember measles a year or so later. I had chicken pox at 19. Confirmed by a doctor, and I remember the brat who was bending the walls of the waiting room because his mother said he had to show his spots to the doctor. I always wondered why I had the spotty disease twice, and now I know.
        The worrying thing about the vaccination question is that the vaccine seems not to provide lifetime immunity as the disease itself does. Are we making ourselves morre vulnerable in the long term, for the sake of a short immunity?

      2. Gary Ogden

        Jean Humphries: Good point. As far as I know, no vaccine provides immunity for more than a decade or so at most. Important, too, to acknowledge how little we really know about the operation of the immune system.

      3. JDPatten

        Yes, Gary. You remember well. My prime concern, however, is with opportunistic infections that take advantage of suppressed immunity during-the-time-of-measles-illness.
        The controversy (and controversy it is!) over “immune amnesia” is fascinating.
        The article you present is loaded with research links that I have neither the time nor inclination to pursue.
        I will note a couple of things: Much of the research she cites is older than me! Now, that doesn’t necessarily obviate the credibility of the conclusions arrived at, but research methods have drastically changed in the meantime. Just sayin’. I certainly can’t give an answer.
        And, her primary cited article makes its conclusions based on four year mortality following infection. That fellow did not concern himself with the QOL of those children and the adults they became. How many are struggling with profound hearing loss and other continuing after effects?
        My children have inherited much from my wife and me. Mostly good, I hope. They both have inherited my migraines and my tendency to hypertension however. I still have hopes they will avoid my atrial fibrillation. Might they and their children inherit a propensity to opportunistic infection during the course of some viral disease or other – if there even is such a thing? That’s my concern. Best not to test it. Best not to get measles.

      4. JDPatten

        You’re welcome, Gary.
        Oh, and… I tried l-citrulline for quite a while. Had no discernible effect, so I stopped spending for it. ‘Course sleep ain’t simple. Are you certain that it is citrulline that helps you. Placebo and all taken into account?

      5. Gary Ogden

        JDPatten: You are right, I think, to be skeptical. I’ve always slept well, so it may be wishful thinking or the placebo effect, or the fact that it was Spring when I started the citrulline to ascribe improved sleep to it (although I think it must have anti-inflammatory effects, as I only rarely have to get up to pee since I started). I am certain, though, that it has improved my ability to use oxygen, since it has clearly improved my ability to do strenuous hikes with markedly less fatigue. Last year I twice did a 10.2 mile hike with 2,500′ of climbing and descending, and paid for it both times, with a five-day recovery period. This year I did a 9.2 mile hike with 2,600′ of climbing and descending, with no recovery period necessary. The science is solid, and it doesn’t break my budget, at 22 cents a day, so I’ll continue. Plus it tastes good.

      6. Jerome Savage

        Gary, re citrulline. & “only rarely have to get up to pee since I started)
        My fitness is ok, 5 mile hike today with no recovery issues expected. But wud very much appreciate a full night’s sleep. The idea that night time pees are the result of inflammation surprises me ! Citrulline malate to do the trick on my night trickle ?

      7. Gary Ogden

        Jerome Savage: I do sometimes wake too early having to pee, but what I do afterward is get back in bed and read for an hour or so, till I’m sleepy again, and usually end up with sufficient sleep. This is called “segmented sleeping.” Dr. Mercola had a post about it. Apparently, at one time (before the Industrial Revolution) this was a common practice. But I think the citrulline malate is helpful in reducing the number of nights when this occurs. I take 2g first thing in the morning and 2g an hour or so before bed. It also seems to reduce the urgency. I usually sleep 7 hours, but sometimes a full 8 without waking, but never fewer than 5 or 6, and this is when I have a second sleep. Now, if I could do something about the cats yammering to be let out at the crack of dawn. . . .

      8. Jerome Savage

        Greg – In our neck otw my 3 month old G retriever whinges & guerns (pronounced “gyerns”) forcing a pre 7am rise, after 1 if not 2 nocturnal breaks. Doc tells me no underlying condition.

      9. Gary Ogden

        Jerome: Try the citrulline malate. This had an almost immediate effect for me on reducing nighttime potty breaks. I really think it reduces stress-induced inflammation. I’m completely sold on it. Plus it improves my hiking performance. As for the animals, I find ignoring them works, but them a puppy might be more persistent than an adult cat.. Also, try segmented sleep. This is a perfectly normal way to sleep.

      10. Gary Ogden

        barovsky: Correct. And it has this effect on me. But it has other effects as well, improving my overall feeling of well-being and improving sleep. Whether a placebo effect or a real effect I don’t care. It makes me feel calmer. I now take 2g in the morning and 2g in the evening.

    2. Don132

      “Association does not mean causation.”
      Association also does not mean, as is so often implied today, non-causation and mere coincidence.

      Reply
  32. Caroline

    Thank you, remarkable insights and very valuable for the ongoing debate around this polarising issue. We need to remove the emotion from this subject and apply the pure scientific principles to get us closer to a reasonable solution.

    Reply
  33. Dr HRC Pankratz

    Again, my compliments on a cogent introduction to a matter of critical importance to public health. I follow you because you courageously shine light in shrouded and shameful areas of “pharmerce” – willing to be ostracized as a whistle blower. That alone helps me stave off complete nihilism toward my world of family medical practice, thank you!
    you said
    “Others have gone much further than me”
    Do you have a suggested reference?

    Reply
    1. anglosvizzera

      Donna, even when people know about this, they are often unable to claim because their child was under 2 years of age, thus making them ineligible instantly!

      “Time limits on making a claim
      “You can only claim for a child once they are 2 years old.

      “To claim for an adult, apply by whichever is the latest of the following dates:

      “on or before their 21st birthday (or if they’ve died, the date they would have reached 21)
      within 6 years of the vaccination”

      If they are old enough, there has to be proof that they are more than 60% ‘disabled’ as a result of the vaccine:

      “Disablement is worked out as a percentage, and ‘severe disablement’ means at least 60% disabled.

      “This could be a mental or physical disablement and will be based on medical evidence from the doctors or hospitals involved in your treatment.”

      And then you have to have ‘proof’ that it was actually the vaccine that caused the problems….

      Reply
    2. barovsky

      It states:

      When and where the vaccination must have taken place

      You must normally have been vaccinated before your 18th birthday, unless the vaccination was during an outbreak of disease in the UK or the Isle of Man, or it was against:

      poliomyelitis
      rubella
      meningococcal group C
      human papillomavirus
      pandemic influenza A (H1N1) 2009 (swine flu)
      meningococcal group W before your 26th birthday

      The vaccination must have been given in the UK or the Isle of Man, unless you were vaccinated as part of your armed forces medical treatment.

      Reply
  34. G. Belanger

    Thanks Malcolm! Please, if you have an inclination to do so, I would urge you to keep doing the research into vaccines, but instead of publishing blog posts that open you up to the scrutiny of the www, put everything into a solidly referenced book in which every statement is one of fact supported by the evidence it needs to be demonstrated as such. This would really be an invaluable resource for all who actually want to know the truth.

    Reply
  35. Göran Sjöberg

    What a crazy greedy medical world!

    In front of my eyes the whole house of cards has now crumbled and the medical lies are now glaring although it has taken about 20 years in my case.

    It all started with my own very serious MI which alerted me to look for the science as being a long time researcher in the natural sciences (aerospace materials).

    # CABG – no use found and my refusal.

    # Same with the CVD medications

    # T2D – what a craziness to advocate carbs + medications to victims instead of telling them to stay away from both the carbs and the medications if it was not for the profit made on the now 500 000 000 cases.

    # Cancer – the malignant cells living mainly by glucose and the medical advice advocates carbs and sugar while a ketogenic state seems to be the most beneficial one as has clearly been demonstrated by by Prof Thomas Seyfried.

    # And the mental disorders of our society where the medications are proven to be of no use but here is the real big business with 10 % (?) of the world population on antidepressants

    # High blood pressure medications – the real gold mine! What an institutionalized scam

    Ooh – I forgot about the vaccination scam.

    Reply
    1. goransjoberg2015

      I realize that I was probably a very “brave” patient 1999 when I refused the scheduled CABG a couple of weeks before the actual operation. Though, I had as a researcher made my solid homework during the preceding three months following my MI.

      When Malcolm now brings the CABG up as an example of necessary precaution in medical procedures and refers to Dr. Bernard Lown’s experiences on this issue I couldn’t refrain from refreshing my memory.

      https://navigatinghealthcare.wordpress.com/2012/03/20/a-mavericks-lonely-path-in-cardiology-alternative-view-on-cardiac-intervention/

      I have certainly read this before but it is still great reading of an uphill battle for decency in medical practice.

      Reply
  36. Sarah Stacey

    Dr Richard Halvorsen goes into detail on vaccinations in his book The Truth About Vaccines which was triggered by an article I commissioned from him around 1999. I had followed the controversy for some years and been disturbed by the lack of research on efficacy and side effects, plus the burden on an infant’s immune system of three, often five, in one jabs. I wrote a piece for The Sunday Times when an expert in the field told me that encephalopathy was a potential very rare side effect but that it wasn’t in the public interest to include it in my piece. (I did.) There was a medical expert in the Dept of Health around the turn of the century who highlighted the lack of research/evidence and called it a scandal. Can’t remember his name but he went on the record.

    Reply
    1. anglosvizzera

      Sarah, you did the world a huge service by asking Dr Halvorsen to write the article!!!

      His book is an excellent introduction for those parents who want to make a more informed decision regarding their child’s vaccinations and it’s one I have a few copies of to lend out to such parents. He is criticised by the ‘anti-vaccine’ lobby of course because he still advocates vaccines and offers, where possible, single vaccines and aluminium-free vaccines at his clinics. He also offers a consultation to parents, which my daughter and her husband used, to help them reach a compromise for their baby. He is concerned that much more research is needed, and that more and more vaccines are added to the schedule with little thought to the outcome:

      http://www.drhalvorsen.co.uk/extra_effects_news.html

      and:

      Reply
  37. gildedcell

    An excellent blog.

    As an aside I would be very intrigued if anyone who has taken the time to comment here has any information about the possible adverse effects of Smallpox vaccine on any of the systems of the body please. I had the smallpox vaccine in 1962 as a result of the outbreak in South Wales. I have had ME since 1970 but there was clearly a long prodrome with symptoms going back to my earliest memories. In other words I can’t remember not having symptoms which then eventually became significant enough to be a clearly defined disease entity in 1970… diagnosed 20 years later in 1990. I have been ill almost 50 years and housebound for the last 25. I do not know if the Smallpox vaccine could have been any more to blame than any other vaccine, or whether vaccine played any part in my disease process at all (I’m not ‘anti-vaccine’ per se) but given the emerging understanding of my disease it’s very likely that ‘ground zero’ lies in the mitochondria. Any information pointing to a causal link would be interesting on a personal level.. who knows it could be useful in a wider sense too?

    Reply
  38. Michelle

    I am the middle child of five, only one of us, my second youngest brother had the measles vaccination. Not long after this he was struck down with encephalitis, he spent many weeks in Hospital and very nearly died. He is now in his fifties and while he did make a complete recovery, he has always suffered from spatial awareness problems. My Mum is not a Dr, in fact she was a school dinner lady, but as a Mother of five she has always been absolutely sure that the vaccine lead to the encephalitis, and nothing will ever persuade her differently.
    I can’t wait to show her your post. Thanks for being a lone voice in the wilderness.

    Reply
    1. Michelle

      Just to be clear, he was the only one out of the five of us, who was vaccinated. Our old school Indian GP was scathing about vaccination, and told my Mum never to vaccinate the youngest, which she didn’t.

      Reply
  39. suezan36

    Thankyou and I appreciate the post. A scarey world is approaching for our children and grandchildren. Feeling helpless

    Reply
  40. peterlepaysan

    Does any one monitor the quality of the vaccines?
    The active vaccine ingredient may be health safe, in that it only activates an appropriate immune response.
    That vaccine is immersed in carrier mediums. I suspect water may not be necessarily present.

    Has anyone anywhere evaluated the effects of vaccinating carrier mediums.?

    Just saying. The message may be ok, the messenger could be a problem.

    Reply
    1. anglosvizzera

      peterlepaysan, many of the vaccine ingredients may be suspect, for example aluminium salts used as adjuvants in non-live vaccines or Polysorbate 80, and countless other chemicals used to grow the cultures which have exotic names such as “Eagle medium” – you can see a list of vaccine ingredients here:

      http://vk.ovg.ox.ac.uk/vk/vaccine-ingredients

      But even if, as you say, it’s the ‘messenger’ that may be the problem, many of the ‘active’ ingredients such as the viruses in the MMR or the flu vaccine normally cause infection through inhalation or ingestion, and not by injection directly into the body – so this mode of entry may also play a part. When a viral illness is contracted in the normal way, the immune system kicks into action, not to produce antibodies initially, but in other ways during the ‘incubation period’ – only once the infection starts to show recognisable symptoms do the antibodies start to be produced.

      But vaccine efficacy is only measured by antibody levels during the development stage of a vaccine, ignoring the other normal physiological responses that take place in a natural infection.

      Reply
  41. peterlepaysan

    The medical profession, as well as a lot of others, suffer from primal primate egotism;
    lawyers, accountants etc invent their own rules of acceptable behaviour, using language designed to deny knowledge to us benighted peasants.

    It is long overdue that the “professions” submitted themselves to independent judicial oversight.

    Medics seem to rely on statistical correlations rather than causation.

    Don’t the drug companies love this.

    Medics are overworked with little spare time, so private research does not get a chance to do serious study into (in my experience) often quite erroneous claims in so called academic studies.

    The very well trained ( highly paid )drug company sales people know this and exploit it.
    Vaccines are in the same camp.

    Reply
  42. Soul

    Ohh, what a tiring morning. Keeping awake is difficult. I’m hoping no one snuck into my room and gave me a flu shot overnight. The whole vaccination situation is a sad affair. I wish more could be done to improve what is going on. Hard for me to imagine anything will be done though soon.

    I was thinking the same exact thing about what is happening with Boeing, government oversight and what happens with health care. This whole mess with Boeing could have been avoided with better oversight.

    It isn’t new activity but saw a month or two ago the head of the FDA resigned. He then joined the board of Pfizer Pharmaceutical. Similar happened 4 years ago or so when the head of Health and Human Services (The agency that oversees the FDA) and one of the organizers for Obamacare resigned and then joined a Pharmaceutical board. It’s a resolving door between the police government watch groups and drug companies. It doesn’t give me good confidence in our police government agencies over the health care system or other areas of the economy overseen.

    I guess it can be said that Boeing is in more of a pickle right now. They are going to face more difficulty in trying to reestablish their good name. With health care, and the solid belief it has in the minds of most, safety mistakes even deadly ones are easier to bury, regrettably.

    Reply
    1. chris c

      Yes if Boeing was a drug company they would be indignantly denying that their planes ever fell out of the sky at all and that videos of them doing just that were made by Deniers.

      Sometimes things that go wrong don’t show in testing, like cars that self-immolate or stall at high speed on the motorway. The big difference is that when the problem is acknowledged a recall is done and a fix put into place,

      Reply
  43. peterlepaysan

    Further to the above, who the hell checks the research?
    GPs are overworked and lack time. Bureaucrats interview key boards/pads to protect backsides.

    Academic/”professional” journals are not always squeaky clean.

    There is a lot of noise out there. Voices that should be heard are not.

    I await (with unabated breath) for the entire “professional” GP/Surgical medical “profession” to submit themselves to independent external judiciary review.

    Perhaps when that happens (after hell has frozen over) The medical “profession” could be trusted to offer reliable advice.

    Reply
  44. Annemarie Kamstra

    I’m grateful dr. Kendrick that you are also deeply disturbed by the vaccine debate. I would rather believe that vaccines are safe and that I did the right thing to vaccinate my children, but my knowledge of child development and the development of the immune system forces me to ask questions. To understand an issue, I often listen to the “other side” to enhance my understanding. In this way I have found that there are many “Kendricks” out there, as well as many scientific studies to support the notion that we do not have all the answers about the safety and workings of vaccines.

    https://thevaccinereaction.org/about-us/ On this site there is a plethora of information that can at least make one wonder if we know everything.

    Then there is dr. A. Wakefield. His reputation was ruined, but just listen how he explains what happened and is happening with the measles vaccination. Pure science!

    DR. SUZANNE HUMPHRIES is a scientist who gave up her position at a university to follow her own conscience. http://drsuzanne.net/

    This is on a Dutch website, but if you scroll down you can see STUDIES THAT WERE DONE COMPARING VACCINATED AND UNVACCINATED INDIVIDUALS IN ENGLISH. The institute had to go to court to force the authorities to give them the information.
    https://stichtingvaccinvrij.nl/volledig-gevaccineerd-versus-ongevaccineerd-een-samenvatting-van-wetenschappelijk-onderzoek/?utm_source=Nieuwsbrief&utm_campaign=1b245302a7-RSS_EMAIL_CAMPAIGN&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_b82845e552-1b245302a7-230764993

    If they and we do not keep asking questions we would not be able to live with our own conscience.

    Annemarie Kamstra

    Reply
  45. Jan Lilley

    Thank you Dr Kendrick. It is such a relief to hear a voice of reason. My son was vaccine damaged but most people have a hard time believing that and others seem to think that some people have to ‘take it for the herd’. I am sure they would change their mind if it happened to their own child.

    Reply
    1. AhNotepad

      Jan, it is disturbing to hear about your son. You are probably aware this “herd immunity” guff doesn’t apply to vaccine generated diseases. It can only work with natural occurances.

      Reply
  46. Christopher Exley

    A considered piece which in Alice’s world will have you considered, as I, as anti vaccine.
    You asked about the EMA. I have written to them asking the simple questions; how is the aluminium content of a vaccine measured; how does the EMA check that the information on this provided by manufacturers is correct. The answer is that no one measures the aluminium content of a vaccine, it is assumed that the data from the manufacturer are correct and, assuming the manufacturer does make such a measurement, the EMA cannot disclose how the measurement is made as this is considered a trade secret. Just one example of where we are told that ‘everything is checked and regulated’ is clearly not the case. I am sure there are many others.

    Reply
  47. David Bailey

    Malcolm,

    I think everyone is aware that there are a lot of mentally damaged children around – far more than when I was young. That could be because:

    1) Such children are no longer hidden away from society.

    2) Many more children are being saved at birth (particularly premature ones), but they can’t be saved from brain damage.

    3) Something – such as vaccines – is doing the damage.

    Are there any statistics that can disentangle these causes?

    Reply
    1. anglosvizzera

      David, having worked as a paediatric medical secretary for a few years, it would appear that the aetiology of many conditions that may well be caused or triggered by a vaccine is not discussed; at least, not in any kind of officially recorded document. Having typed up hundreds of letters dictated by paediatricians when meeting parents and their child for the first time, there is never any mention of ‘why’ or ‘when’ something started. As for vaccination, the usual line dictated was so and so “is up to date with their vaccinations” or similar. Not being in the consulting room I have no knowledge of whether parents may have suggested a link with a vaccine, but I’m pretty sure that this idea would have been dismissed immediately!

      After that job I worked as a teaching assistant in a secondary school and also wondered about the aetiology of the conditions of the children I worked with – but could never ask, of course. Aside from those diagnosed with ASD or autism, there were plenty of children who appeared to have some kind of learning difficulty or behavioural problems which would not necessarily give them a diagnosis but was enough to cause difficulties in the classroom.

      I remember, like you, that there were very few children with these kinds of problems back in the 1960s when I was at school, maybe the odd ‘naughty boy’ (usually boys) or those very few who went to ‘remedial lessons’ for a while – but they were able to function in society once adult, not like many of those affected today. I also knew nobody with asthma or peanut allergies or anything else like that…

      Reply
    2. Justin

      Pretty safe to say that it’s the injection of dozens of vials of proven neurotoxins into children that is the cause – take a step back from worthless and corrupt ‘studies’ and ‘statistics’ and use your common sense

      Reply
      1. AhNotepad

        Justin, you may be correct, but there are other factors that changed along with the change in vaccination frequency. One was introduction of glyphosate. This has been linked to autism by Stephanie Seneff.
        To support your position there is https://childrenshealthdefense.org/wp-content/uploads/Vaxxed-Unvaxxed-Full-Presentation-2.pdf which contains the CDC’s own unpublished data. However, agluttin in modern wheat is associated with damage to the gut lining cells which allows substances to pass into the blood stream, and damage to the blood brain barrier and so allows transport of normally prohibited substances. Vaccines may be a factor, but possibly not the only one.

      2. Gary Ogden

        AhNotepad: Certainly not the only factor, but with the aggressive schedule, with 18 injections of 24 antigens in the first year, beginning on the first day of life, it is unquestionably the major factor. What scientist in their right mind could ever approve injecting every newborn on the day of birth for a disease (Hep B) only afflicting 1% of pregnant women, and whose immunity wanes long before any other likely exposure to the disease? Insanity. Dangerous insanity. Rotavirus is another entirely unnecessary vaccine in the developed world, but it did make Dr. Paul Offit rich beyond his wildest dreams.
        https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/schedules/index.html

  48. David Cockburn

    Brilliant as usual. Thank you.
    If or when you next make time for CVD
    studies I would love to hear your views on CRISPR techniques which produce unwanted off target affects. Recent news of some CVD related research suggests human ancestors lost a gene – CMAH some 2 million years ago which may be a reason for our higher risk of CVD. This gene includes a sialic acid sugar molecule called Neu5Gc which has been retained over time by apes and chimps. I have not yet seen the detail of this research done on mice
    and the implication that apes and chimps do not get CVD seems spurious. Probably too little science in this news item for you to get excited but risky genetic interventions for CVD will happen as there seems to be a growing market for genetic quick fixes. Not that I am considering it as I am doing fine after getting off statins and having a fairly healthy lifestyle, but your criticism would be welcome. Maybe the resulting CVD-free hairy humans can produce a costume free Planet of the Apes movie while they wait for the genetic reversal to fix the fix.

    Reply
    1. andy

      David Cockburn: re chimps and heart disease

      https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3352420/
      Heart disease is common in humans and chimpanzees, but is caused by different pathological processes
      “While captive great apes have a relatively healthy diet from the perspective of atherosclerotic risk (low in cholesterol and saturated fat), this is not reflected in their serum lipid profiles.”

      Reply
      1. AhNotepad

        Andy, it might be cholesterol and saturated fat have nothing to do with atherosclerotic risk, now there’s a problem …………….

      2. janetgrovesart

        I read or heard somewhere recently that modern fruits and some vegetables aren’t suitable for zoo animals because they are too sugary. How often does one see “super sweet” on packs of tomatoes, raspberries, strawberries, etc?

      3. Heather Green

        I would argue that the diet (low in cholesterol and saturated fat) is the wrong diet, and is WHY their serum lipid profiles are not as expected.

      4. andy

        Heather Green: my diet is high in cholesterol and saturated fats, low in carbs. Last test, cholesterol 8.14 mmol/L (315 in American units). Perhaps the chimps and I should be on statins.

      5. barovsky

        Mine is currently 6.6 and I’m being harassed to take either a statin or the alt. ezimtibibe (sp.?). I have an excellent, healthy diet, exercise, don’t smoke, have the occasional drink but feel constantly stressed.

        Question: is ‘high’ cholesterol the body’s response to inflammation caused by who knows what? I’ve lived in central London for the past 17 yrs, so it could be caused by diesel particulates + stress? My GP thinks so.

      6. andy

        barovsky: a healthy low carb/high fat diet will result in high cholesterol. Apparently if your energy comes from fat rather than glucose you need moreVLDL/ LDL particles to transport TG to tissues. This is how the body works. If you do a search there are experts to explain the process.

      7. barovsky

        Yes, I do have a low carb/’high’ fat diet. I cook with organic, cold pressed coconut oil and that’s it, lots of fresh veg/salads and the occasional red meat (lamb) but mostly fish/wild salmon and free range chicken, fruit and organic oats. A cup of home brewed espresso a day but I’m on all kinds of meds. The one that I’m most concerned about is the thyroxine, basically because it doesn’t seem to work! I’ve just had the dosage lowered as the TSH suddenly got very elevated (16.x), so now I’m on 75mg, down from 100mg but still have the same symptoms I’ve had for decades (very sensitive to cold (under 22C I start shivering unless I’m bundled up), brittle nails.

      8. Sasha

        There are some good Hypothyroidism groups out there. One is Thyroid UK (I think that’s what it’s called). Their work may be helpful to you.

      9. barovsky

        Yes, I used to use their site but they’re too closely associated with the NHS in my opinion, which will only sanction thyroxine, which appears to have only a negative effect on me.

      10. Sasha

        There’s another patient advocacy organization TPAUK, I think that’s what they are called

      11. andy

        barovsky: there could be a connection between consuming plenty of vegetables and thyroid function. Check out oxalates and thyroid. I got rid of my rhubarb and spinach and feed the Swiss Chard to the chickens. My knee is now back to normal. Plants could be medicinal but only in small quantities.

      12. barovsky

        Rarely, if ever eat rhubarb and only occasionally spinach. Mostly broccoli, carrots, peppers, mushrooms, peas, onions/shallots. Lots of garlic and ginger and spices of all kinds, in every meal and I tend to switch around a lot so as to vary my diet.

        As to the thyroid issue, right now I’m concerned about how the beta blocker/anti-coagulent/blood pressure combo is interfering with the thyroxine. I feel like dumping the entire mess!

      13. Justin

        Seeing as there’s no link between CVD and saturated fat and cholesterol consumption that’s hardly surprising

      14. anglosvizzera

        barovsky – not sure if this is helpful, but the halides such as fluoride, chlorine and bromine can undermine the thyroid as they are taken up preferentially by the iodine receptors of that gland. So avoiding them may be helpful? Obviously avoid fluoride toothpaste and products, filter chlorine out of your drinking water and avoid processed foods that may contain bromine (sounds like you do that anyway.)

        Also, I’m not an expert on anything to do with thyroid problems but remember reading that many patients find synthetic thyroxine completely useless and therefore use armour thyroid (derived from pigs’ thyroid glands) instead, finding that it works for them. Obviously the NHS claims that there is no advantage, but plenty of people seem to disagree…

        https://www.sheffieldccg.nhs.uk/Downloads/Your%20Health%20docs/armourthyroidforhypothyroidism.pdf

      15. barovsky

        Been there, done that. I already mentioned that thyroxine doesn’t work for me and the NHS won’t supply Armour or its equivalent (Naturethroid), I could get it privately but aside from cost, what dosage to take? My GP has never heard of it even tho she’s sympathetic. She’s written twice to the ENT at Guys and they simply don’t reply. When I first started taking Thyroxine 10-12 yrs ago not only did it induce severe pains in my legs when walking within a day of starting on it, it also put me into some kind strange, disconnected, dream-like state that lasted for 3 years! I woke up one morning as if a veil had been lifted from my mind, so I assume my body finally adjusted to it even if it still didn’t deal with my symptoms.

      16. anglosvizzera

        I expect the data that the NHS relies on regarding synthetic vs natural thyroxine is swayed by the pharmaceutical companies that make the former. In which case nothing will change, even if millions of people claim that the natural form works and the other one doesn’t.

      17. barovsky

        anglosvizzera: the history of thyroxine versus the natural (extract of pig’s thyroid) is a perfect example of pharma’s control. Pig’s thyroid as a treatment for hypothyroidism goes back to the last decade of the 19th century, when it was discovered and used very effectively up until I think the 1960s when a bad batch was manufactured and this was used as the excuse for replacing it with the synthetic thyroxine.

        The thyroid is a complex organ with interactions between the pituitary, the hypothalmus and the adrenal glands, it’s a kind of ECU (Electronic Control Unit) for the body, maintaining homeostasis. The natural extract contains 3 of the required homones but thyroxine works very differently by (in theory) triggering the production of the necessary hormones using TSH (Thyroid Stimulating Hormone), and only one of the hormones, which probably explains why it doesn’t work for everybody.

        Thus, after being on it 10 years or so, I still have the exact same symptoms now as I did before I was put on thyroxine. I’ve explained this to my GP til I’m blue in the face, but if I take too much thyroxine (an extra 25mg) gives me heart palpatations (quite scary).

      18. KJE

        barovsky: Thyroid UK (TUK) although on the NHS “list” are very much advocates ot NDT and T3 for those who need it, and not at all in the NHS’s pocket. Also try TPA (thyroid Patient Advocacy

      19. barovsky

        I have been trying, without success, for years now, to get an alternative to thyroxine and Thyroid UK are in no position to help. Yes, they tell you about the alternatives but it’s down to my gp and she’s had no success either.

      20. KJE

        It si perfectly legal to import medicine for your own use. So that’s what you have to do. Thyroid UK 1) have a petition to help people who need it get T3 2) a list of more enlightened GPs and endos (though you’ll probably have to pay privately because of NHS rules 3) a way to message people to ask for safer resources for buying your own meds. TPA (thyroid patient advocacy have a similar set up). You can’t blame a voluntary organization for being unable to to overturn the NHS and NICE.

      21. chris c

        My problem is hypERthyroid, but I had a discussion with my GP where she admitted they have a few patients on T3 but they have to be “very careful”, presumably not to get caught. I believe the main problem is that the sole supplier to the NHS put up its price by several thousand percent. Don’t the NHS employ buyers any more?

  49. Bill

    If vaccines really were “safe and effective,” full stop, I believe this would be the only such example in the entire history of medicine. I cannot think of any other medical intervention that is completely safe or completely effective, much less both at the same time. Biology simply does not work like that. We are obviously in the world of propaganda and not science.

    Reply
  50. barovsky

    Well I had a vaccination against polio when I was around 10-11, in the mid-50s. I didn’t get polio but then again, I might not have gotten it anyway. I think I also got a vaccination against diptheria, probably around the same time. Again, I didn’t get diptheria but would I have gotten it if didn’t have the vaccination? How can you prove a negative? It seems that the argument for (or gainst) vaccinations rest on a circular process as it’s never been tested one way or the other.

    Those who condemn those who oppose vaccination, seem to pin their hopes on the ‘fact’ that there is no way of establishing a link one way or the other, therefore it would seem logical under these circumstances that individuals should be left to make up their own minds about whether or not to be vaccinated and not be criminalised!

    And finally, as ever, there’s the financial implications and probably the most scandalous example, the ‘swine flu’ pandemic that wasn’t, with millions of public money ending up in the hands of big pharma, paid for a vaccine that did absolutely nothing!

    Reply
    1. anglosvizzera

      Two of my four children were completely unvaccinated and their older siblings had the first lot of vaccines, the eldest also having preschool jabs. Back then there were far fewer vaccines, mainly diphtheria, pertussis, tetanus and polio – we declined the MMR. None of them got polio or diphtheria, either vaccinated or unvaccinated – nor did any of them get pertussis or tetanus. I guess the fact that the MMR had been introduced contributed to the fact that they also didn’t get measles, mumps or rubella – although two of them had something which may have been rubella, but it was dismissed by the GP as ‘just a viral infection’, so how would anyone ever know? When one of them became pregnant, she hoped to find out whether she had any evidence of immunity to rubella but we no longer test pregnant women for rubella immunity in the UK because, apparently, it’s ‘gone away’. She could pay for an immunity test, of course, if she really wanted to know.

      Reply
      1. barovsky

        well that’s kind of a backhnded way of saying the vaccine not only didn’t do what it was meant to do but in fact did the opposite!

    2. Heather Green

      I agree. My mother had a shingles vaccine years ago and subsequently (not immediately) developed shingles. So why vaccinate for shingles? The party line as I remember it was, her case would have been worse had she not had the vaccine. How could they KNOW that?

      Reply
      1. barovsky

        I’m not sure if it was here that I read it, but apparently, getting measles as a child (I got it) gives one a lifetime immunity as long as one gets subsequent exposure to the disease occasionally via contact with kids who get it thus reinforcing your immunity. Shingles is caused by the same virus as it apparently ‘lurks’ somewhere in your body. Getting vaccinated stops the body’s immune system from acquiring the antibodies thus opening up the chance of getting shingles later in life. My local surgery asks me to get a shingles vaccination every year (ditto flu). I decline. But it’s actually more complicated as my brother got the shingles vaccine and as yet hasn’t gotten shingles. Vaccine or what? Who knows, and again, how do you prove a negative?

      2. AhNotepad

        It isn’t necessary to get occasional exposure to maintain immunity. This was discussed by Andrew Wakefield in his video somewhere on this page. The data were found from the Faroe islands, where the only people not to get measles were the ones over 70, who got their immunity from the previous outbreak. There were no measles cases in the intervening years.

      3. anglosvizzera

        barovsky – you’re thinking of chicken pox, aka varicella, which is the same virus as shingles, not measles. Otherwise you are correct that the virus can ‘lurk’ in the body and be reactivated later on if one’s immune system becomes weak, and having chicken pox in the ‘background’ acts as a kind of ‘boost’ to the immune system. Who knows what lies ahead once chicken pox is ‘eradicated’? A disaster, I’m sure! Since introducing the chicken pox vaccine in the US, it seems that children are now getting shingles as a result. Awful.

      4. JDPatten

        Heather,
        If you had actually seen my sister suffer from shingles you might not even have thought to question the vaccine. She suffered excruciating (narcotics!) pain for more than a year with a bloody scalp presentation that eventually blinded her on that side. So, the selling point (granted, the proof ain’t there) of reducing severity if you should get it after the shot was good enough for me.

      5. JDPatten

        Barovsky,
        You have confused measles with chicken pox.
        That should be a lesson on being careful of what one accepts as gospel here.
        Avoid this contagion: Confirmation Bias.

      6. Jean Humphreys

        J D Patten – Barovsky may have onfused measles and chicken pox in the shingles story – but let us not be too hard on him. That young whippersnapper of a bullying doctor/know all/ media pundit, said that measles was a danger to pregnant women’s unborns. I didn’t think so, or have measles and rubella (German measles) become one and the same virus now?

      7. Gary Ogden

        Jean Humphreys: Sounds like that doctor has confused rubeola (measles) with rubella (German measles), which, by the way got the name because much of the early rubella research was done in Germany.

    1. Gary Ogden

      Marjorie: Thanks for posting that. Amusing, indeed. We sure as hell need all the amusement we can get!

      Reply
  51. anglosvizzera

    I’ve just seen this study about aluminium adjuvants in vaccines and its safety:

    “Our calculations show that the levels of aluminum suggested by the currently used limits place infants at risk of acute, repeated, and possibly chronic exposures of toxic levels of aluminum in modern vaccine schedules. Individual adult exposures are on par with Provisional Tolerable Weekly Intake “limits”, but some individuals may be aluminum intolerant due to genetics or previous exposures. Vaccination in neonates and low birth-weight infants must be re-assessed; other implications for the use of aluminum-containing vaccines, and additional limitations in our understanding of neurotoxicity and safety levels of aluminum in biologics are discussed.”

    https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0946672X17300950

    Reply
  52. Michael B

    It’s a shame that there can’t be something similar to NNT (Numbers Needed to Treat) for Vaccines – NNV. I’ve seen one estimate that the NNT for Statin Drugs Given for 5 Years for Heart Disease Prevention (Without Known Heart Disease) is 104 to prevent a heart attack with no savings of life and a 1 in 50 chance of developing diabetes and a 1 in 10 chance of muscle damage. I wonder what the NNV for some of these vaccines would be? Of course, without RCTs or proper scientific trials we’ll never know.

    Reply
  53. Gaetan

    As usual, pro-vaxxers have a blind beliefs about vaccines. They were told from their youth that vaccines saved the world, just like we were told that myopia is a genetic problem and we need glasses to address it. LIES!!!

    When vaccines were introduced for most viruses or illnesses in the 50s-60s, most diseases were practically gone on their own, or human beings had developed the correct anti bodies to protect themselves.

    Vaccines, like the rest of the medical establish, work by preventing symptoms, while the cause is still there.

    There is only one way to be healthy and it’s to have a strong immune system along with a perfect nervous system for an adequate sympathetic and parasympathetic response.

    now, the real question is, how do we achieve that? Certainly not by injecting deadly adjuvants in our blood stream.

    Reply
    1. Gary Ogden

      Just to clear something up here: There are three main ways of injection. 1. Intramuscularly (into muscle tissue), as most vaccines are. 2. Subcutaneously (under the skin), as the TB test is. 3. Intravenously (directly into the bloodstream), for feeding or delivering a therapeutic such as vitamin C. Variolation (scratching the antigen into the skin) was used for smallpox, and may still be used, but I don’t know.

      Reply
  54. Afifah

    You are much beloved in our house, Dr Kendrick.

    Heroes are those who put themselves in danger’s way, for the sake of others, and succeed.

    You will succeed.

    Thank you!

    (Hugs heading your way in abundance)

    Afifah

    >

    Reply
  55. Frederica Huxley

    I find it highly disturbing that we are told we must accept vaccines without question, whilst virtually all ‘alternative’ medicine is rejected outright because it hasn’t been subjected to RCT.

    Reply
    1. Jessie

      Me too, but we know who runs the show, there is no money in alternative medicine and health and I think everyone has lost touch with what it really is and how to achieve it. I do feel very sorry for people who are faced with the dilemma of vaccines, there is so much pressure to conform and the vast majority of people will not be reading this blog but rather the hype and misinformation spewed out by the media and our health systems. I have flatly refused to take statins over the years but I am sure somewhere in my records is a black mark saying “uncooperative” or worse. Apart from A&E and emergency surgery (if needed) I have totally lost faith in the health system who seem at every turn to apply pressure and make you feel guilty and even worse, that you must obey without question.

      Reply
    2. Jerome Savage

      I read comments by, let’s call them an observer that a least we have regulation of a sort for “official medicines” but none for “alternative.
      Continuing on the theme, a social media poster, (for want of a better word) currently doing the rounds shows a faith healer in action followed by ” WE DONT SEE FAITH HEALERS IN HOSPITALS for the same reasons clairvoyants don’t win the Lotto”

      Reply
  56. John U

    Dr. Kendrick, I have read probably all of your posts over the years. They have been excellent. However, this one really stands out. I think it might very well be one of your most profound.

    Reply
  57. elizabethhart

    Earlier this year I came across the explanation for where we are now with the sinister imposition of more and more vaccine products. This is the ‘missing link’ that has been a revelation to me in understanding the current oppressive status quo of a rampant vaccine industry supported by academia, doctors, ‘regulators’, politicians, lobby groups, the journal industry and a biased mainstream media which refuses to critically analyse vaccination policy.

    A presentation by Dr Suzanne Humphries alerted me to the Children’s Vaccine Initiative (CVI), particularly The CVI Strategic Plan – Managing Opportunity and Change: A Vision of Vaccination for the 21st Century, published in 1998 by the CVI’s co-sponsoring agencies i.e. the United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF), the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP), the World Bank, the World Health Organization (WHO) and the Rockefeller Foundation. You can access the pdf of this report via this link: http://apps.who.int/iris/handle/10665/64635

    The CVI Strategic Plan is essential reading for anyone trying to understand the current hostile situation relevant to vaccination policy, with citizens who dare to question ever-increasing vaccine schedules and vaccine safety and effectiveness being reflexively labelled ‘anti-vaxxers’ and marginalised and shut down.

    The CVI Strategic Plan is the blueprint for the manipulation of the entire international community by a coalition of organisations from the public, non-government and private sectors, apparently working in the best interests of the vaccine industry.

    This is a massive international political scandal, with more and more governments moving towards mandating lucrative vaccine products, e.g. Australia, the United States and Italy, and actively denying citizens the right to question burgeoning vaccine schedules and coercive vaccination policy.

    Suzanne Humphries summarises the situation in this video on facebook: https://www.facebook.com/HealthNutNews/videos/317815328766484/ (How long will we have the freedom to share this information on facebook, before faceless ‘panels of reviewers’ deem dissent about vaccines as ‘fake news’ and censor discussion?)

    I’ve transcribed the Suzanne Humphries’ video from 0.32, see below:

    QUOTE:

    In 1997 the World Health Organisation formulated a strategy which was put into a book called The Strategic Plan, which laid out a map to completely change the way people thought about vaccines.

    The plan had key points, which were using the media to structure messages that shaped public opinion to co-opt or persuade key opinion people in all levels of society – medical, lay and entertainment, to get pro-vaccine spokespeople at every level conveying one message and one message only.

    This plan emphasised private/public partnership and philanthropy, with the aim to make vaccines a core topic in society. Anyone who reads this book can clearly see that this was a plan which would result in what I would call a ‘slow cooking’ of human frogs from cold water, hopefully that we wouldn’t even notice what was happening, to get us all to a point where we could see nothing else other than the dogma.

    Part of that plan came to fruition in a big way when Bill Gates stepped up to take his place in the World Health Organisation plan. People who are part of this plan are called stakeholders, not just by me, but it’s an acceptable term. Private stakeholders existed for the last 20 years but never more obviously than in 2015. The whole public face of vaccination has changed, and a large part of that change has been due to the involvement of private individuals.

    In 2010, the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation donated $10 Billion, with a ‘B’, to make 2010 to 2020 the Decade of Vaccines. The vaccine stakeholders have planted flags everywhere, with some startling results. In 2015 the focus in the United States was on making vaccines mandatory for all people, and they were successful in some places, making vaccines a lifestyle event for all people, from cradle to grave.

    The World Health Organisation’s strategic plan was printed first in 1993, and then it was updated in 1997, and it morphed into the global immunisation vision and strategy which Bill Gates often makes reference to in his publicity, and you can see it right here in that last paragraph, the Global Alliance. Today we have a computer software billionaire, the pharmaceutical industry, academia, and the US Department of Homeland Security* and the World Health Organisation all speaking and working in unison towards the same goals.

    These alliances should have anyone who listens and watches asking lots of questions because the goals are to restrict our health freedom, to censor what we read and can say, and remove our ability to choose what goes into our bodies.

    (*Should this be US Department of Health and Human Services?)

    END OF QUOTE

    Suzanne Humphries refers to the involvement of private individuals such as Bill Gates, who is exerting enormous influence over international vaccination policy via the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, as described in the report Philanthropic Power and Development: Who shapes the agenda? https://www.brot-fuer-die-welt.de/fileadmin/mediapool/2_Downloads/Fachinformationen/Sonstiges/study_philanthropic_power_and_development.pdf

    The Gates Foundation’s tentacles are spreading everywhere, even to funding the supposedly ‘independent’ and ‘unbiased’ Cochrane group.[1] And now Microsoft, of which Bill Gates remains a director and advisor on key development projects[2], has formed a strategic alliance with Walgreens to develop ‘new healthcare models’.[3] Walgreens promotes vaccine products too.[4]

    Who is examining Bill Gates’ conflicts of interest in influencing international vaccination policy and promoting vaccine products?

    Again, the Children’s Vaccine Initiative Strategic Plan is the blueprint for the manipulation and exploitation of the global community with an ever-increasing load of vaccine products, without adequate transparency and accountability.

    The impact of this strategic plan must be examined in the current context, this is a massive international scandal that must be analysed and exposed.

    References:
    1. Are Cochrane reviews truly “independent and transparent”? https://worldmercuryproject.org/news/are-cochrane-reviews-truly-independent-and-transparent/
    2. Microsoft Leadership – Bill Gates: Founder and Techology Advisor: https://news.microsoft.com/exec/bill-gates/
    3. In Blockbuster Alliance, Walgreens and Microsoft To Develop ‘New Healthcare Models’: https://www.forbes.com/sites/brucejapsen/2019/01/15/walgreens-partners-with-microsoft-to-develop-new-healthcare-delivery-models/#3b23d26828db
    4. See for example: The Flu Shot: What You Need to Know: https://www.walgreens.com/health/p2/a/900002/the-flu-shot-what-you-need-to-know/2447311

    Reply
    1. andy

      elizabethart: CVI Strategic Plan looks like a setup by WHO and associates for world population control in the name of healthy vaccinated children. When these children reach reproductive age there could be problems. Profits to be made at both ends.

      Reply
      1. elizabethhart

        Yes Andy, it’s interesting to consider the motives of the CVI Strategic Plan… All this emphasis on saving ‘millions of lives’…what’s the evidence?

        The thrust of this 1998 report is setting the scene for making the international community compliant to the implementation of ever-more vaccine products, e.g. “Vaccines that effectively prevent rotavirus diarrhea, pneumococcal pneumonia, meningococcal meningitis in infants and cholera in older children and adults are near initial introduction and, if made widely available, could prevent up to two million deaths due to these diseases each year.” (p.3)

        Really? It’s time for retrospective analysis now. Certainly it has come to pass that rotavirus, pneumococcal and meningococcal vaccine products are being pressed upon mass populations, will this increasing vaccine load prove to be beneficial in the long-run? Or not?

        With the over-use of vaccine products I suspect we are being set up to face similar problems as with the over-use of antibiotics. Can we rely on any independent and objective analysis of the current over-vaccination epidemic? Not in my experience of investigating vaccination policy so far… This over-vaccination agenda is being foisted upon us, without effective consultation with, or accountability, to the community.

        Indeed, citizens who dare to question the emerging mandating of medical interventions, i.e. vaccinations, are being deliberately marginalised and shut down. This is an astonishing development in our liberal democracies, and the political implications are going way under the radar.

      2. chris c

        Maybe we are going to need the vaccines when their vegan diet wrecks our immune system. Just a thought . . .

    2. chris c

      Another thought: once they make vaccines mandatory (think of the children!) how long before they make statins and low fat diets mandatory too? I heard of a diabetic who achieved excellent control for which she was praised UNTIL they found out she was using a low carb diet. She was told to stop it forthwith or she would be dropped by her doctor “and we can tell if you are complying because your triglycerides will go up” like that was a good thing.

      I expect meat to be taxed soon, and probably banned altogether once the “vegan meat” factories are in full swing. The effects on human health and the environment will NOT be what they claim. After all the planet was far hotter when all those buffalo were grazing the American plains. Oh, wait . . .

      Reply
  58. Soul

    As someone who has been ill for his entire adult life, it’s odd for me thinking about the health care industry. It’s a field dominated by females, which as a male, doesn’t help. Well, I guess dominated is a debatable definition. Interest in the topic domination maybe better said along with workforce. I’ll have to give that some thought, see if I can pull things together on my end, and change course in my thinking. I’ve tended to think health care interest is in large part less formal, more basic.

    I hope forced vaccination doesn’t become the new normal. One has to wonder though if we are blindly heading that direction. As you well highlight Dr. Kendrick, there are to many areas with vaccination that remain unanswered.

    Reply
  59. Afifah

    One approach when handling those that would shout you down for daring to question the dogma is to use the Scott Adams (the Dilbert cartoonist) approach. He is now a very active political pundit and Trump supporter, which obviously garners constant derision and hints at a failure of integrity. When that type of tweet or comment is aimed at him he now just tells them “I don’t talk to nazis’ and blocks them.

    Indeed those who would force vaccines, in increasing numbers, on us all, from the day we are born to our old age, we should just call them nazis, as that is precisely what they are! Force, force, force.

    We must stand up to bullies, and call them NAZIS!

    They won’t like it one bit!!

    >

    Reply
  60. colettebytes

    Some years ago (around age 50), I had a number of vaccinations for world travel plans. Because I was unable to spread them over a long period, booster shots for polio, tetanus, dptheria, encephalitis, hep a and b, and yellow fever inoculations were issued over a three month period. The last (typhoid fever and yellow fever were given a few days before I left for a three month stay in Spain before going on a world trip. It was only two days into Spain that I started feeling really unwell. My osophegous felt like it was on fire, deep into my chest. Arriving at destination on a Friday afternoon, I was desperate to see a doctor. I found a private one who agreed to see me after his clinic ended at 6pm. I felt as if I would collapse.
    At first, I didn’t mention the vaccines (not making the connection), but when the doctor became quite alarmed at the swelling of my parotid glands and asked me if I had been exposed to anyone who was very sick… I mentioned them. He told me he would give me three drugs to try to stabilise me. He said he could not do more than that, but if I were to get worse, to go directly to hospital. At any rate, I was to go back on the Monday when he would conduct blood tests… He thought I had glandular fever. The three drugs were imunoferon, a powerful antinflammatory and an antibiotic. He told me that my immune system was collapsing. I did respond to the drugs he prescribed, and because we had a travel schedule, did continue on with my journey, but that episode left me with all sorts of sensitivities to food and other things that I never had before (or at least not in such intensity). I did mention my reaction to my gp months later, but he just kind of dismissed it. I wonder how many other reactions are equally dismissed? The private doctor I saw in Spain, said I was lucky to find him as I may have died without intervention.

    Reply
    1. Louise

      Me too. Trip in the late 80s to Burma etc preceded by a pile of vaccinations. No warnings issued before I had them but when I was seriously ill away and on return had loads of ‘well it could be this, that or the other arising from the vaccinations’. Unbelievable. I am very skeptical these days.

      Reply
    2. chris c

      We were lucky when I was young, we only went to Europe but we were given smallpox “boosters”. Mine was uneventful as was my father’s but mother’s arm swelled up like a rugby ball and she had it in a sling for a while. Hard to claim that wasn’t the vaccination. The only other thing that caused such a reaction was cleg bites. She didn’t have eczema but did have Crohn.s which is autoimmune/inflammatory.

      Reply
  61. paul pennifer

    Hi Dr Kendrick.
    The winter flu vaccine may be another breach of the primum non nocere principle.
    1. Several years ago my wife and I had the flu vaccine. Very shortly afterwards we both were very ill with what appeared to be a bad dose of influenza. Two friends also had the same experience. Searching for “”side effects of flu vaccine” resulted in the assertion that “it is impossible to contract flu from the vaccine since the antibody in the vaccine is “dead”. Reading your blog I now realise that this statement is unsupported by any evidence as is the case for those vaccines in your blog.
    2. There are some reports on efficacy of the flu vaccine. These show that efficacy is hit and miss at the least. In one year there was a mismatch between the vaccine and that years strain. Result: efficacy zero.
    So our experience supports your blog sir.
    Power to your elbow.
    Regards
    Paul Pennifer

    Sent from my iPad

    Reply
    1. anglosvizzera

      In all the hospitals and the private GP practice that I’ve worked in, I’ve always declined the free flu vaccine offered – usually the only person that did. But, like you and your wife, the majority of the staff who did have it were ill with flu-like symptoms not long afterwards. In fact, one of the GPs at the private practice was off for about 6 months with some chronic after-effect and I don’t think she was ever right again after that. There are so many ‘anecdotal’ reports of this kind of thing that you would think someone would make the connection! My sister, who also worked in the NHS and did have the flu vaccine, said that they were told that any adverse reactions that people had was psychosomatic and that it was ‘impossible’ for the flu vaccine to cause them!! A friend of mine developed Guillain-Barré syndrome after a flu vaccine years ago. At the time he didn’t make a connection with it, but when I was training as a Bowen practitioner, during the initial consultation I remember him saying that he’d had it and when I asked if he’d had the flu vaccine, he then made the connection. Sadly he died a few years ago of a brain tumour, the kind that is now being associated with mobile or cordless phone use.

      Reply
  62. Tony Poole

    Newspaper headlines today:

    Express – “Heart attack risk if you stop taking statins”
    Times – Taking statins after 75 “nearly halves risk of heart attack”
    Telegraph – Stopping statins “raises heart attack risk by half”

    What new erudite research has led to this I wonder?

    Reply
    1. Jerome Savage

      French by all accounts – interestingly no reference to rates of;
      1. heart failure, or 2.cognitive disorders or 3.effect on life expectancies.
      We don’t know if 1 & 2 has increased (if so how much) or if 3. has reduced (and again if so by how much)

      Reply
      1. Jerome Savage

        AHN Bought the times to check it out. ,
        Glanced at the article, intended to read it more thoroughly to find obvious errors or bias but my time got caught in repairing 2 bikes both of which had rear gear problems this morning. Morning cycle lost to the car. Thanks for highlighting the relative risk nonsense.

  63. Donna

    Dr. Kendrick, just wanted to thank you for having the courage to write on such a contentious subject. I’m thoroughly enjoying your deviation from CVD. My oldest son is 36. When he was 4 yrs old, he woke up with swollen cheeks. The ER doctor was genuinely perplexed. He stated that his only diagnosis would be mumps, but he had never seen it, therefore couldn’t be certain. His confusion was evident in that my son had been vaccinated. Thus began my curiosity in the efficacy of vaccines. Ironically, as a nurse, I’m now forced into a yearly flu vaccine or wear a mask the entire flu season. I’ll take the mask.

    Reply
    1. AhNotepad

      Donna, technally being forced to wear a mask to stop a virus is bullying. Illegal in most “civilised” countries. What would the mask stop anyway? A virus will get through a hole that would stop the molecules in air. Therefore the mask is not fit for purpose, unless it is to bully the wearer.

      Reply
    2. Jennifer

      Donna. As a Nurse working in ENT, ( in early 1990s), a young doctor called on my ‘experience’ of diphtheria, because an unwell patient had presented with text book symptoms of the disease. Well, I had to advise him that, although grey haired, I had been born well after the introduction of the vaccine, (in 1942, I think), and was therefore just as unlikely as he was to know how on earth diphtheria presented in reality. Let’s hope that this particular vaccine has proven to be beneficial, ( as seems to be the case in UK), although I understand it is not irradicated in certain parts of the world.
      If the said vaccine has indeed been the reason for such a reduction in deadly diphtheria cases, then, once again, we return to the conundrum of ‘to vax or not to vax….that is the question?’
      A wealthy nation : a poor country. Almost 80 years of data to base our answer on!
      Maybe the only question ought to be ‘to afford or not to afford’.
      Suggestions, anyone?

      Reply
    3. Gary Ogden

      Donna: Good for you! The U.S. Army showed, back in 1920, in two well-designed trials, that influenza is not trans-missable. Not trans-missable. For health-care workers to be forced to get the vaccine or wear a mask is as ridiculous as anyone getting the vaccine. On average, only 15% of people with flu-like illnesses have lab-confirmed infection with any of the influenza viruses (see Peter Doshi in BMJ). Thus, the best possible efficacy of any influenza vaccine is, on average, 15%. Each year is a new vaccine, based upon the best guess as to which strains will be circulating. They often get it wrong. So efficacy is likely in the single digits, if more than zero, which I think most likely.

      Reply
  64. Justin

    For those that have the time, look into the connection between vaccination and SIDS – clear as day as far as I’m concerned

    Don’t hold your breath waiting on any studies into this contentious area

    Reply
    1. Jerome Savage

      And wiki says “A speculated link between vaccines and SIDS has been refuted, but remains a common anti-vaccine trope”
      So there you hav it – in a nutshell!

      Reply
  65. Martin Back

    A vaccine story…

    In the 1970s we were travelling through Italy. Due to car trouble and with the nearest campsite already closed for winter, we found ourselves camping in the garage of an elderly Italian couple. We only saw the lady of the house in the morning and in the evening when she came to feed her rabbits. So when she appeared at midday, very excited, we knew it was something important.

    “La pesta! La pesta! Multo morte! Multo morte!”she cried.

    She could only speak Italian. Using my high school Latin I managed to gather that she had heard on the radio that some sort of deadly disease had broken out in Italy. We hitchhiked to the nearest town and deciphered from the Italian newspapers, with some help from the locals, that there had been several deaths from cholera due to eating contaminated seafood in Naples. Nobody knew how widespread the contamination was, and all tourists were advised to get vaccinated.

    We were told to go to a clinic in the nearest big town. How will we find the clinic? we asked. (This was years before GPS of course.) Oh, don’t worry, you will find it easily was the reply.

    And so it proved. We drove into town and soon saw a large crowd pushing and shoving outside a building with a big red cross. In the crowd were many Italian mothers with babies, each one desperate for her precious baby to get its shot. Babies were crowd-surfing as mothers at the back, who had no hope of pushing through the crowd to the front, passed them overhead and they were carried on a forest of hands towards the door, emerging a short while later and crowd-surfing back again as the mother jumped up and down, anguishedly crying “Bambino! Bambino! Mi bambino!” until she had her baby safely back in her arms.

    We wondered how we would get through the crush, but as soon as they heard we were tourists, the crowd parted like magic and we were in and out in a few minutes, rubbing our arms and leaving the desperate masses behind. And we didn’t get cholera and there were no adverse effects.

    Reply
    1. Sasha

      I am not sure what this story proves or disproves. Or how it addresses questions that people keep raising about the current vaccination schedule.

      Reply
      1. Martin Back

        I’m not trying to prove or disprove anything with the story. It’s a memory that popped into my head as I was reading the comments.

        But it does bring out one thing, namely the belief the general public has in vaccines. If you could have seen the desperation of the people to get their shots, you would appreciate it. Vaccines, antibiotics, and statins seem to be regarded as life-savers.

        I’ve mentioned before that my doctor prescribed antibiotics when I went to him with a dose of flu. When I queried this, he said yes, they don’t do anything for flu, but he prescribes them because people expect them.

        Also, I worked for a medical aid that refused to pay for statins, on the grounds that our medical advisor regarded them as not efficacious. Our members almost rioted. Basically they accused us of condemning them to die of heart attacks, and we rescinded the no-pay policy pretty quickly.

        This blanket condemnation of vaccines for a scattershot of reasons is going to go nowhere. The perceived benefits of vaccination loom too large in the public mind. A more targeted approach picking off vaccines one by one would be far more effective.

      2. JDPatten

        Martin,
        The doc giving you an antibiotic for the flu was a criminal!
        Having said that, I must back up and state that one must watch for any opportunistic bacterial infection whenever the immune system is challenged. Then an antibiotic might be appropriate.

        There are instances when antibiotics are clearly appropriate.
        My appendicitis presented as a mild tummyache. The appendix was actually black, dead, and swollen. (Lucky my good wife scolded me to go in!) Zosyn (piperacillin-tazobactam), given over five days by IV challenged my microbiome seriously. Zosyn also made it possible for me to hang around a while longer and nurture that poor microbiome.

      3. Martin Back

        I was quite angry about the doctor prescribing antibiotics needlessly, knowing how they are over-prescribed. But on reflection, I figured his job is to make the patient feel better, and if he knows the patient will feel comforted by taking antibiotics, then he will prescribe them.

        I never spoke to him about the issue, but I imagine many patients ask for antibiotics because they believe in them, and he got tired of arguing with his patients that they don’t need them, and issues prescriptions because the patient is happier and his life less stressful.

      4. Sasha

        Martin, all true regarding many public misconceptions about meds but I don’t think there’s a blanket condemnation of all vaccines for a scattershot of reasons. At least not in my mind even if I think that reasons are far greater than scattershot.
        The party line is – all vaccines are good for all people at all times. And the more the merrier. I certainly don’t think so. How do you fight that? Especially when the opposing side won’t give an inch. Maybe because they understand that once they do, a lot of things may crumble.

      5. anglosvizzera

        Martin, you said, “…his job is to make the patient feel better…” I would argue that his job isn’t to do what the patient expects, but to educate the patient about antibiotic use and the problem we now have with antibiotic resistance! If his attitude is just to ‘give in’ and prescribe the drugs, that’s exactly why we are now faced with the problem of resistance…

  66. Kim

    In the US, vaccine injuries and deaths are reported to VAERS… Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System. According to a Harvard study, less than 1% of vaccine adverse events are reported. As they are, the numbers are not good, but if you calculate the true potential numbers based on that, you see that injuries and deaths are really not that “rare”. But an industry that has no liability and enjoys government mandates has little interest in the risks and therefor no need for actual safety and efficacy studies. Imagine being forced to buy a Toyota due to government mandate and if something goes wrong, you can’t sue. This is the dream come true for the drug companies. Totally wrong!

    Reply
  67. greenhind

    Thank you for this post. Much appreciated. Like others on here, I have tried in vain over the years to get answers to my vaccination questions. Now, more than ever, debate is being shut down. Your defence of science is so refreshing ☺️

    Reply
  68. AhNotepad

    For those who have read enough, https://soundcloud.com/nvicstandup is a page of podcasts from NVIC. Interesting that the requirements to ensure vaccines are safe before licencing include novel statistical methods and anecdotes. Interesting also that anecdotes do not constitute sufficient reason to indicate vaccines are unsafe after licencing.

    Reply
  69. Stuart

    Thank you Malcolm for being brave enough to enter this debate.
    It is indeed scary that governments are either mandating vaccinations or moving in that direction without the science to back up the assertions that they are ‘safe and effective’. It is also scary that the full spectrum of the MSM now act as a propaganda machine to push this line and even the likes of Facebook and Google are jumping on board too. It would appear scientific censorship has become the norm when it comes to vaccines because ‘the science is settled’.
    Our regulatory agencies EMA and the FDA appear not to be looking out for the people they are there to serve. The lack of a placebo control in the safety studies for the HPV vaccine is a case in point where in no way could you describe having one to have been unethical.
    Also the compensatory system in the UK is not fit for purpose. The British government refused to pay compensation to those affected with narcolepsy after the H1N1 vaccine despite their clear acknowledgement that this vaccine had caused their condition and the victims had to take them to court in order to receive it.
    The Mawson (pilot) study https://antivakcina.org/files/MawsonStudyHealthOutcomes5.8.2017.pdf is indeed concerning and the fact that there has been no follow up is doubly so. If the relevant agencies really wanted to prove that vaccines are safe and effective and to shut up dissenters a retrospective study of a range of health outcomes of vaccinated vs unvaccinated would be top of their list but if the outcomes were anything like the Mawson study we would need a complete rethink on how best to serve our children’s health costing Big Pharma billions. In my opinion we need a concerted effort to for such a study to be done in the name of common sense.

    Reply
      1. Gaetan

        Well, the ”do no harm” premise has been forgotten a long time ago i think. There are many examples of stupid going on from the medical community right now. The decision and policy makers are largely doctors. Whether they are rotten by big pharma yellow envelops or not, the others simply look away.

        When is it gonna change? what will it take?

      2. Stephen Rhodes

        @Gaetan;
        You ask what will it take.

        Maybe if there were more incidents of fatal side effects as recently with Professor Martin Gore, or psychotic episodes leading to life threatening events – as with Malcolm Brabant (BBC reporter) – and possibly of ‘accidental’ death in the case of the Cambridge student in Madagascar. The latter remains to be shown, but even if it is you won’t see it headlined as the blame is already being assigned to other pharmaceuticals so won’t impact the vaccine debate.

  70. Ati

    A comparative study could be done – plenty of parents, religious communities and other groups opt out of vaccination if they can and never vaccinate. One could follow the lives and health of such populations and compare to a group of similar, vaccinated people. As far as I know, it seems that the Mennonite community does not suffer from the typical diseases of the day due to their lifestyle and refusal to vaccinate.

    Reply
    1. Anna M

      A lot of Mennonites eat a lot of crap and sugar.
      I did once hear a radio interview with a doctor who had a practice in California and most of his yuppie parents did not vaccinate. He claimed there were virtually no asthmatics in his practice, involving some few thousand children over several years.
      A problem I see with people finally saying ‘enough’ is that it is a frog in warm water situation – the decrease in health is slow and insidious. Plus of course there are several causes, not just vaccines.

      Reply
      1. Gary Ogden

        Anna M: Right you are. Glyphosate is another big one. In addition to its toxicity, it is a glycine analog. Glycine is critical for the building and repair of soft tissues, and I suspect most people don’t get enough from dietary sources. We can produce it, but not enough, especially as we age. Glyphosate interferes with this process of repair. Makes me wonder how this impacts CVD. Although the politicians mainly hide under rocks, everyone should be alarmed at what is happening to our children. The rate of special ed in Ireland is now 25% (in my teaching days it was around 7%). Violence by schoolchildren directed against teachers has become normal now. It is a holocaust caused by seemingly unaccountable incompetent and cowardly bureaucrats and politicians not holding rapacious industry in check. Nothing wrong with industry making a buck, but the only reason we have government is to protect the public from harm.

  71. Jean Humphreys

    Barovsky – I am sure you are right about the measles disease giving a lifetime immunity – but you are slightly off course with shingles. That one is caused by the chicken pox virus. I still wouldn’t have the shingles vaccine though.

    Reply
  72. Soul

    Learned sad news this morning. A doctor that lived up the street from my parents neighborhood passed away. Everyone in the neighborhood loved Mario. He will be missed. He was in his middle 90s and in declining health for some time so the passing was not surprising.

    What was surprising to me and my father was the lengths Dr. Mario want to extend his life. One example of several, earlier in the year he had a new heart valve installed. He was close to passing away as his kidneys were shutting down. I believe not enough blood was being pumped at that point causing the kidney issue. He was on dialysis. He never recovered from the valve procedure. His legs would not work and he lost his ability to leave the house on his own. He saw several leading doctors about why his legs stopped functioning. Then it was decided he needed chemo therapy. I don’t know much about his cancer. It certainly made me wonder about the timing of the chemo in his very weakened condition. Dad and I were questioning to our selfs if it wasn’t the cancer treatment that eventually did him in.

    Regardless personally Dr.Mario was a wonderful guy. He was a pioneer in the fertility industry. Two of his sons are leaders in the medical community. One is the head cardiologist at a hospital in New York City. For this blog sight, to me Dr. Mario was somewhat of a puzzle. On the one hand he was not pleased about some of what was happening in medicine, with costs and some treatments. There were a number of treatments he thought poorly on. He was not afraid to be critical of the medical community, offering advice to others in the neighborhood. He showed others how to buy quality prescription medicine from Canada at discounted prices. On the other hand, as shown by his actions he did believe in much of modern medicine, to the point that toward the end of his life he kept doing treatment after treatment. My father suspects up to a million dollars was spent in the last year for various treatments. I know the two of them talked about Medicare bills. A lot of money spent, for shortly extending life, that was of poor quality during that time.

    Reply
      1. Soul

        Thanks Sasha. I’m familiar with that article. It is interesting. I don’t know if that is the norm or not.

        It’s easy for me to play arm chair quarter back in a situation like this. I don’t know all the details about the doctors case. Our neighbor obviously wanted to live longer and have a better quality of life. I think though it is fair to say he was in a good deal of pain in his last year. The treatments didn’t help him, or help much. They were costly. He was likely taken advantage of during his last year of life. That at least is my opinion. Possibly miracles happen in situations like this. I have my doubts though. I can say though that the medical field was and has been very good to him and his family.

        The late doctor was also known as a pioneer in sex changes. If you were not careful enough in what you asked at neighborhood food gatherings, he was liable to tell details on how easy it was to surgically transform a male into a female. As we began to joke, no one was a better sausage barbecuer in the neighborhood.

  73. elizabethhart

    Malcolm, you say: “I also know that by daring to write on this subject, there will inevitably be people moving behind the scenes to have my blog taken down. I cannot imagine WordPress management going to the wire to protect my right to free speech. A little flick of a switch, and I will be gone from the airwaves.”

    This is a pretty dire state of affairs isn’t it? Seriously, citizens daring to question vaccination policy are being stifled and even shut down, this is astonishing in our liberal democracies.

    For example, a citizens’ conference was organised in Sydney in June last year to discuss vaccination. I was invited to make a presentation on the subject of conflicts of interest and lack of transparency and accountability for vaccination policy. The venue of this conference had to be kept secret until a few hours before commencement because there are groups in Australia who seek to shut down such citizens’ meetings.

    Fortunately, due to careful planning, the meeting went ahead and presentations were videoed and live-streamed on facebook. People who are interested in some background on conflicts of interest in vaccination policy might be interested to view my presentation which can be accessed via this link: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=atKeooIrHE8 (June 2018)

    My presentation examines the influence on international vaccination policy of powerful individuals such as Bill Gates and Rupert Murdoch, and the network of conflicted academics involved in industry-funded vaccine trials who are also influencing vaccination policy, particularly Terry Nolan, the former Chair of the Australian Technical Advisory Group on Immunisation, and Robert Booy, the Chair of the industry-funded Immunisation Coalition.

    There are also conflicts of interest in the evaluation and regulation of vaccine products. The Australian Therapeutic Goods Administration assesses and registers vaccine products using manufacturer supplied data. The TGA is funded by industry for this service. The TGA’s role as evaluator and regulator of vaccine products is compromised by its reliance on industry funding, the TGA has a conflict of interest.

    The transcript of my presentation, including powerpoint slides, is accessible via this link: https://elizabethhart.files.wordpress.com/2018/07/conflicts-of-interest-in-vaccination-policy-e-hart.pdf

    As mentioned above, Murdoch influence on vaccination policy is very significant. In this regard see my open email to Rupert Murdoch and Lachlan Murdoch of News Corp, challenging the influence of their media group on vaccination policy in Australia (i.e. the implementation of the coercive No Jab, No Pay law), and the failure to disclose conflicts of interest in this matter, i.e. the Murdoch family’s association with the Murdoch Children’s Research Institute which is involved in industry-funded vaccine product research and development: https://elizabethhart.files.wordpress.com/2018/07/gmail-murdoch-media-groups-influence-on-vaccination-policy-in-australia-_-conflicts-of-interest.pdf (19 July 2018)

    Reply
    1. AhNotepad

      Elizabeth, I had to laugh, you mentioned “our liberal democracies”. There might be one somewhere, but The Seekers referred to it as “the promised land”.

      The Australian vaccine schedule is horriffic, not quite as bad as the US, but more than bad enough. Do any of the (evil)/(ignorant) people (they can pick which bracket they best represent, but it will be one or the other, who dream up this ridiculous regime have any understanding of the fear in these children when they are about to be assaulted by a needle? And the chronic pain many of them undergo as a result of the vaccine adverse effect, compounded with the failure of medics to diagnose the problem?

      Reply
      1. elizabethhart

        AhNotepad, the Australian vaccination schedule is effectively under the control of the vaccine industry and the Murdoch media.

        We are in an absolutely dire situation here, with little or no transparency or accountability, and with our supposed elected representatives deliberately ignoring citizens concerns on this matter and pandering to the vaccine manufacturers.

        The current Australian Prime Minister, Scott Morrison, was the Social Services Minister back in 2015, when the No Jab, No Pay Bill was raised. This was in response to the aggressive ‘No Jab, No Play’ campaign run by the Murdoch tabloids, see for example this Editorial in The Daily Telegraph, published in May 2013, and which is one of the rare articles still openly accessible, i.e. not behind a paywall: ‘Editorial: Time to stop keeping kids immune from jab’: https://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/time-to-stop-keeping-kids-immune-from-jab/news-story/67508c933e443f0340017b0a78ad1f20

        The aim of the Murdoch media’s No Jab, No Play campaign appears to be to create an intolerant environment which will brook no questioning of vaccination policy, and to ensure the community will be compliant to an ever-increasing vaccination schedule which is awash in conflicts of interest.

        For more background on the situation in Australia, including conflicts of interest, see my email addressed to Scott Morrison and other politicians, forwarded before the Australian Federal election this year: ‘Challenging conflicts of interest in coercive vaccination policy and the over-use of vaccine products – an important issue for Australian citizens/taxpayers’, 7 May 2019: https://elizabethhart.files.wordpress.com/2019/05/gmail-challenging-conflicts-of-interest-in-coercive-vaccination-policy-and-the-over-use-of-vaccine-products-an-important-issue-for-australian-citizens_taxpayers.pdf

      2. AhNotepad

        elizabethhart, thank you for the comprehensive reply. How the dirty digger gets away with it, I don’t know. You may know, his son, James was on the board of one of the major pharma companies, when that same company was having a problem with its “known to be a problem”, MMR vaccine. So brian deer was comissioned to write lies about Andrew Wakefield. These companires and media have got away wit it ever since.

        If we manage to leave the EU, I hape we don’t get a “deal” with the US. They will use it to buldozer all their rubbish into the UK. Vaccines, GMO, and anything else the world would be better off without.

      3. Gary Ogden

        AhNotepad: That trade deal has been in negotiation for months. The instant Brexit comes, it will be announced with great fanfare.

      4. AhNotepad

        elizabethhart, I read through your conflicts-of-interest blog, and went on to look at the presentation at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=atKeooIrHE8. The comments should be some required reading for anyone who thinks there are largely benefits from vaccines. They may see reason question their earlier thinking.

    2. Sasha

      Why do you think the Murdochs and Gates are so involved in vaccination policy? Maybe they genuinely believe in it?

      Reply
      1. Gary Ogden

        Sasha: I don’t know much about the Murdoch motivation, but for Bill Gates it is twofold, the first being pecuniary, the second population reduction. He makes no bones about it in his Ted talk on strategies for world population reduction. The first on the list, on the chart he displays, is vaccines. Meanwhile his own (four) children are unvaccinated. His childrens’ physician let this fact slip out in a dinnertime conversation at a medical conference. How many of the children of pharmaceutical industry scientists are unvaccinated? I would bet it is a large number. Gates’ public persona is one of philanthropist, but he is nothing of the sort.

      2. Sasha

        Gary and JohnQ: I always thought that people at the level of wealth of Gates or Murdoch are motivated by ideas, not money. I may be wrong, of course, as I have no way of knowing what they think.

      3. andy

        Gary Ogden: A quick Bing search revealed the Bill Gates philanthropist reasoning for mass vaccination of children
        1- primarily for 3rd world areas with high birth rates
        2- produce healthy children through vaccination
        3- parents of healthy children will have fewer children due to guaranteed survival. Children needed to care for elderly parents.
        4- end result will be population stabilization

        If philanthropist idea does not stabilize population then tweaking the vaccines might be required, like more potent adjuvants to reduce sperm counts. (my opinion)
        Murdoch will provide the benevolent propaganda story line. Media control is required assisted by technology from Bill and Melinda.

      4. elizabethhart

        Good question Sasha, why are the Murdochs and Gates so involved in vaccination policy…?

        In regards to the Murdochs, the Murdoch media is currently aggressively lobbying for meningococcal B vaccination to be added to the taxpayer-funded schedule in Australia. This is how vaccination policy is being formulated in Australia, i.e. via tabloid newspaper campaigns. It was the Murdoch tabloid ‘No Jab, No Play’ campaign which resulted in the Australian Federal government’s coercive ‘No Jab, No Pay’ law.

        Most Murdoch media articles are behind the paywall, but consider this recent headline in the Daily Telegraph: ‘Meningococcal B vaccine must be urgently added to the National Immunisation Program’.

        My issue with this is invasive meningococcal disease is very rare and mass vaccination is not justifiable. There are other issues too, e.g. this is yet another aluminium-adjuvanted vaccine.

        For more background, see my recent email to Professor Andrew Wilson, Chair of the Australian Pharmaceutical Benefits Advisory Committee, the group which has so far rejected meningococcal B vaccination three times, but remains under pressure to add it to the taxpayer-funded schedule: https://elizabethhart.files.wordpress.com/2019/07/gmail-re_-media-blitz-promoting-meningococcal-b-vaccination-for-the-taxpayer-funded-schedule.pdf

      5. AhNotepad

        murdock and gates are both in it for the money. They are both extremely rich, and have gone through most of their entire life chasing money, they are not altruistic.

  74. Martin Back

    One of the anti-vaccine arguments is that some of them contain mercury or aluminium, which are claimed to be harmful. While vaccinated and non-vaccinated groups cannot be compared for ethical reasons, I see no obstacle to comparing vaccines for the same disease, some containing mercury or aluminium, and some free of them.

    Then perhaps we could have some solid science in one aspect of vaccines instead of the general mud-slinging on unproven accusations which is what we get now.

    Reply
    1. anglosvizzera

      The reason aluminium salts are used in some vaccines is to stimulate an immune response. Without it, the vaccine wouldn’t do anything (unlike a ‘live’ virus in a vaccine which causes an immune response on its own) – so there would have to be some other adjuvant to provoke an immune response, presumably another metal salt…but until it is acknowledged that aluminium adjuvants are harmful, that’s never going to happen!

      Reply
      1. anglosvizzera

        Stephanie – unfortunately my French isn’t quite good enough to understand everything in the article, but I got the gist of it. Professor Roman Gherardi’s research seems to be ignored here in the UK, just like Professor Exley’s. I noticed when I was last in Switzerland a few years ago that it’s very easy to buy aluminium-free deodorant (eg Nivea) whereas the UK version still contains aluminium. I did contact them to ask why this was, and their reply was:

        “Thank you for your further e-mail regarding NIVEA Aluminium Free Deodorant.

        “We can confirm that a NIVEA Aluminium Free Deodorant is indeed available in some countries. However, our NIVEA product range varies with each country and subsequently there are slightly different ranges available in different countries, dependant on demand and local consumer needs.

        “We are however pleased that you have managed to source some stock in Switzerland. In the future if this option is not possible/viable, you may wish to search the internet for an online supplier, who may be able to ship this product to you in the UK from overseas, although we cannot guarantee any shipping costs incurred or product availability.

        “It is helpful for us to receive feedback from our consumers as this helps with the future planning of our product range in the UK, and your comments will be fed back to our head office, who may consider bringing this product into the UK range in the future.”

        I replied to this email, asking them about the safety of aluminium. They fobbed me off with this:

        “We have enclosed our statement on Aluminium which you may find interesting;

        “We would assure you that a great deal of research and development is conducted on the formulation of all our products within the NIVEA range and all products and ingredients are subject to full product safety clearance in compliance with the European Cosmetic Directive.

        “European laws require all cosmetic products to be safe and each one must undergo a rigorous safety assessment by appropriately qualified and authorised scientists. Safety assessments may only be carried out by qualified professionals and must cover the finished product, all of the ingredients and how products will be used. The requirements for safety assessors are so stringent that there are only around 400 or so in the whole of the UK. They must be medically qualified, registered pharmacists, Chartered Biologists or Chartered Chemists, and have appropriate experience to make the assessment.

        “In answer to your concern about the use of Aluminium in skin care being a health hazard, experts and research bodies including the Alzheimer’s Society have studied these questions before. To date there has been no concrete evidence linking Aluminium in skin care to any health concerns. In 2003 the U.S. Food and Drugs Administration published a major study on anti-perspirants looking specifically at the safety of Aluminium. After their extensive testing program, it concluded that antiperspirants and their Aluminium salts are safe. ”

        This was in 2016, so Exley’s and other’s research regarding aluminium in topical products was available. If it’s so safe to use aluminium, why are these products available in Europe and not here?

      2. Jennifer

        Well fancy that! A few years ago on this blog, we must have been discussing aluminium as used in cosmetics, but I do not recall the context. I happened to mention my own case study from 24 years ago, but there were no responses, so I thought I was just an odd specimen. To repeat what happened to me:- I was working flat out as a Nurse in the most dreadfully hot and humid conditions in the south of England. Having lived in the north of England all my life, I had never found the need for antiperspirants, as general hygiene was sufficient to get me through shifts. However, I decided that an underarm roll-on might help the situation, and to my horror, I soon developed the most awful skin reaction, so bad that I could not have any pressure on the underside of my upper arms for nearly 3 months. I wrote to the manufacturer, ( forgotten which one),and they answered that I was likely to be allergic to aluminium. It had never occurred to me. I was sent a £20 voucher for my trouble at informing them, but I now think I was fobbed off with their explanation, as plainly, they were fully aware of the potential problem of their product. I was obviously not the only person experiencing the reaction.
        Anyway, I returned Northwards soon afterwards, (where the coastal climate is generally more temperate) and I would never again touch the product with a barge pole.
        It reinforces my feelings that the chemicalisation of modern life is detrimental, and to be avoided as best we can. But, we keep returning to the main driver of all the stuff on sale….profits made by the need to increase shelf life of everything , including food, and as demonstrated this month, medicines and vaccines.

      3. anglosvizzera

        I think that the UK public is often kept in the dark about what is hazardous and what isn’t. I know that my relatives in Switzerland are always far more informed about things, and know about them years before we do, so the pressure for aluminium-free products from the consumers probably has more of an effect. Over here, Brits seem to be very laissez-faire about most things, often assuming that if it’s for sale, it must be safe!! (Or, if it’s prescribed, it must be safe, and so on…)

      4. mmec7

        Aluminium adjuvants – regrowing blood vessels – see what they are doing here :-
        Interesting item today – Science Daily
        https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2019/07/190731145813.htm
        Another trick up the immune system’s sleeve: Regrowing blood vessels
        Posted: 31 Jul 2019 11:58 AM PDT
        Peripheral artery disease, which affects 8.5 million people in the US, can cut off blood flow to the arms and legs, sometimes forcing doctors to amputate limbs. A new approach uses a biomaterial scaffold to recruit the body’s own immune T cells to help regrow blood vessels in mice with hindlimb ischemia, supporting immune engineering as a possible treatment for vascular diseases.
        But…*Not so interesting. Use of…aluminium ! Use of aluminium mentioned as the ‘necessary’ and, how effective aluminium is in this research – More Alzheimer’s on the way no doubt. Nutty research to use aluminium when they KNOW how damaging to the brain aluminium is. Now, add to the use of aluminium in vaccine production and, help. Disaster for the patient – how does one side-step the disaster ? Sigh.
        Molly C (France)

      5. Stephen Rhodes

        While there is no aluminium in the NHS sanctioned MMR, there is probably plenty in the three other vaccines given at the same 1 year visit – Menitorix, Prevenar 13, and Bexsero.
        Has anyone researched the effect of the adjuvants used in one vaccine with the ‘active’ antigen in the others?

      6. anglosvizzera

        Prevenar (0.125mg) and Bexsero (0.5mg) contain aluminium but Menitorix doesn’t appear to.

        http://vk.ovg.ox.ac.uk/vk/vaccine-ingredients#aluminium

        https://www.medicines.org.uk/emc/product/167/smpc#COMPOSITION

        All of this is on top of the other aluminium-adjuvanted vaccines already given (and already therefore building up body stores of aluminium) – eg Infanrix Hexa (0.82mg) given at 8, 12 and 16 weeks, the aforementioned Prevenar (0.125mg) given at 8 and 16 weeks (then with the MMR), Bexsero (0.5mg) given at 8 and 16 weeks (then with MMR) – then just before starting school another load are given contemporaneously in the ‘4-in-1’ booster…

        But I doubt whether any actual studies have been done on the co-administration of those with the MMR or the co-administration of those given at the tender age of, say, 8 weeks (1.445mg of aluminium at that one visit!!)…the Nation’s children are the guinea pigs but nobody’s recording the data…

    2. Gary Ogden

      Martin Back: While mercury is not an essential part of vaccine production, it remains in most (80+%) of the doses produced of influenza vaccines, including those given to infants. It also remains in the vaccines (other than live viral ones, such as MMR, which never contained it) sent to poor countries. This is entirely a matter of economics. GSK sent a letter to CDC offering to produce thimerosal-free flu vaccines, but CDC declined. As for aluminum adjuvants, they are put there for a specific reason: the vaccine would not produce sufficient antibody response without them. It is not like sugar or artificial sweetener, or regular or decaf. You will never see Al-free DT, Td, Tdap, or DTaP, Hep B, or HPV, since they wouldn’t show efficacy, and thus wouldn’t be licensed.

      Reply
  75. Bill in Oz

    Off Topic & Testing Also
    My gym now requests all members to use an antibacterial gel and to wipe down equipment with wipes impregnated some anti-biotic as well.
    Surely this will guarantee the evolution of new strains of microbes tat are resistant..And thus also lead to ill health ?

    Reply
    1. mmec7

      Bill on Oz : Colloidal Silver will do a grand job, efficacious without all the additives, and, does not injuree the skin / cause an allergic rash.

      Reply
  76. Associazione Europea di Difesa dei gameti congelati, delle Lingue Nazionali, del Ragù alla Milanese, dei Mariti Maltratati e degli Ucelli Migratori

    Oops !
    That is very (interesting) and brave of you !
    But …
    Now you clearly (to dogmaphiles) are on the dark side of the force.
    I fear your statinophilac blind ennemies (they behave more like ennemies than like opponents) will consider you shot yourself in the foot and be delighted.
    I wish you the best of luck.

    Reply
    1. David Bailey

      Malcolm,
      I have to wonder if this comment isn’t some kind of vague threat – particularly given the absurd nickname of the ‘author’. Did you let it through to illustrate the sort of unpleasantness you face?

      Reply
  77. AhNotepad

    14 months old AND GETTING A FLU SHOT????? These people, well, are they people? https://thevaccinereaction.org/2019/07/brain-injured-girl-in-virginia-diagnosed-with-adem-after-flu-shot/https://thevaccinereaction.org/2019/07/brain-injured-girl-in-virginia-diagnosed-with-adem-after-flu-shot/

    But never mind, there are plenty of snouts in the trough who are earning a packet https://thevaccinereaction.org/2019/07/mmr-vaccine-sales-boost-mercks-2019-revenues/

    Reply
  78. Gary Ogden

    In an article posted today on Mark’s Daily Apple concerning the CVD benefits of sun exposure, a researcher was quoted as saying, in addition to NO’s benefit as a vasodilator, it also made the endothelium slippery, teflon-like. Not certain I’ve read that before, but if so, whoopee!

    Reply
    1. BobM

      My problem has always been, how to get out in the sun? If you have a desk job like mine, then many things to do inside on the weekend, it’s tough. Even placing a priority on getting in the sun, I haven’t gotten more than a few hours this summer — which is almost over in New England, USA.

      Reply
  79. Gary Ogden

    Another fascinating story on today’s Mark’s Daily Apple was of a young man struck down with a debilitating illness which left him bed-ridden at age 21. Medicine was unable to diagnose it, so he did a vast amount of research, and found the likely culprit, a problem with the adrenals producing way too much adrenaline (a condition which ran in his family, but heretofore never properly diagnosed). He found a doctor in Birmingham, AL, with expertise in these rare conditions (only 32 cases in all of the literature) who helped him diagnose a tumor-like hyperplasia in the adrenal medulla. He then, along with this wonderful doctor, invented a surgery, previously used only a few times, and only in cats and dogs, to remove, first one, then the other medulla, both times showing improvement. Not an easy task to get approval for such an experimental procedure. He is now fully ambulatory, a medical consultant, and giving talks. Only downside is a permanent reduction in stamina. But this is why I admire doctors, those who really want to do good. Many are like that.

    Reply
    1. Sasha

      Charles, yes I think that’s the author. Having been raised by a family of physicians, I think someone should also write a sequel “How doctors Live”. The smart ones, anyway. The dumb ones do things differently.

      Reply
  80. Don

    Free speech is being shut down all around the globe, always for our own good, of course. Take a look at some of the laws passed in France in the wake of the yellow vest movement. Here in America, anti-vax posts are scrubbed from the internet, conservatives are being banned from speaking on college campuses, and anyone who voted for Trump is labeled a Nazi and assaulted. It’s a lesser world when men such as Dr. Kendrick are silenced.

    It is self-evident to anyone who thinks that speech is restricted when there is something to hide; the truth has nothing to fear. The common man is held in contempt, as he obviously cannot guide his own life correctly without the ruling hand of his betters. But the words of Acton still ring true, power corrupts. Power must be diffused, not concentrated.

    Reply
  81. Angelica Nelson

    I’m not int he habit of dreaming about vaccines because they’re not really central to my health issues. But I did dream of it, a few days ago coincidentally. I woke up asking myself… OK so if I am vaccinated and I go to school.. what do I have to fear from a child who isn’t vaccinated? I mean, according to “them” the vaccine works. So I’m protected. So it’s not really about “irresponsible” people hurting me, is it? Not if we, in fact, believe in the vaccine’s effectiveness.

    Then I thought about doctors, health care workers, and “raising an antibody” and I think what this is about is insurers not wanting to pay for antibody testing to see if vaccines actually work. I think what they’re covering is that people may need to be vaccinated repeatedly to make that work, which is an increase in costs. But it’s also an increase in sanity. To have two sides shouting at each other, neither making much sense… it’s just not civilization.

    There are many more issues about it than this, but this part of it became clear to me recently. It really is about choice, if and only if, vaccines work as advertised.

    Reply
    1. Joe

      To Angelica Nelson:

      “OK so if I am vaccinated and I go to school.. what do I have to fear from a child who isn’t vaccinated? I mean, according to “them” the vaccine works. So I’m protected. So it’s not really about “irresponsible” people hurting me, is it? Not if we, in fact, believe in the vaccine’s effectiveness”

      You have about as much to fear from a healthy, unvaccinated child as you have to fear from a healthy vaccinated child (provided the child isn’t “shedding”). The healthy, unvaccinated child can get exposed to disease by an unhealthy third child, and a healthy, vaccinated child can get exposed to disease by the same unhealthy third child if the child’s vaccine failed.or didn’t take. Additionally, the vaccinated child may suffer side effects from the vaccine itself..

      That’s why the fear of unvaccinated people is not only irrational but unnecessary.

      .

      Reply
  82. Andre Angelantoni

    Oh, Dr. Kendrick, it is far worse than you know. The lack of adequate studies and the consistent hiding of negative results so as not to scare the population from vaccinating has, in my view, brought us past the cross-over point. This is the point when the side effects from these drugs exceed their benefits.

    It is a common misconception that these drugs affect just the immune system. The immune system is tightly integrated with the endocrine, metabolic and nervous systems—the latter of which includes the brain. Repeated vaccination means repeated immune activation, which harms developing brains as well as breaks down immunotolerance systems that prevent the body from attacking itself. This contributes to the 50 million US citizens with autoimmune diseases.

    Peptide cross-reactivity between the many vaccine ingredients and human tissues cause more autoimmune disease:

    “What is obvious is that a typical vaccine formulation contains all the necessary biochemical components to induce autoimmune manifestations….Physicians need to be aware that in certain individuals, vaccinations can trigger serious and potentially disabling and even fatal autoimmune manifestations.”
    — Vaccines and Autoimmunity, Shoenfeld, Agmon-Levin, Tomljenovic, Wiley Blackwell, 2015

    What keeps this damage hidden is that the CDC refuses to compare whole-health outcomes of 100% vaccinated vs. 0% vaccinated. This would answer the question: “Are these drugs cumulatively causing more damage than they are saving from wild infections?”

    Efforts to force the CDC (which the world looks to for questions of safety and effectiveness of vaccines), have all failed:

    H. R. 2832 2007
    https://www.congress.gov/bill/110th-congress/house-bill/2832/text
    H.R. 1757 (113th): Vaccine Safety Study Act 2013
    https://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/113/hr1757/text
    H.R.1636 – Vaccine Safety Study Act (2015-16)
    https://www.congress.gov/bill/114th-congress/house-bill/1636
    H.R.3615 – Vaccine Safety Study Act (2017-2018)
    https://www.congress.gov/bill/115th-congress/house-bill/3615

    Is now a good time to mention that the pharmaceutical industry spends the most of any industry on lobbyists in the US Congress?

    Had we compared 100% vaccinated vs. 0% vaccinated every decade, we would have some idea when vaccine damage exceeded vaccine benefits. My guess is sometime in the 60s but I’m still gathering the numbers to support that hypothesis.

    In the US at least, it is becoming more and more clear that this intensive drug regimen virtually everyone undergoes is driving most chronic disease. A small pilot study shows the stark contrast in health between those who vaccinate to the complete US schedule and those who don’t:

    Pilot comparative study on the health of vaccinated and unvaccinated 6- to 12-year-old U.S. children
    https://www.oatext.com/pdf/JTS-3-186.pdf

    The 0% vaccinated got chicken pox more often—but they were healthier in every other endpoint.

    André Angelatoni
    Project Lead, VaccineCourse.org

    Reply
  83. The Old Curmudgeon

    While I am glad to see so many posts from people who got through the childhood diseases with no fuss and no muss, it should be remembered that such was not the case with everyone. The influenza epidemic of 1918 left holes in my family that could never be filled; whooping cough took my mother’s eldest sister (my grandmother considered herself greatly blessed that her five other children all made it to adulthood; many mothers were not so blessed). Polio crippled my grandfather and had lifelong effects on my mother, though she was fortunate that a couple of years of therapy allowed her to walk more or less normally until post-polio syndrome caught up with her towards the end of her life. Neither she nor Grandpa ever complained, but I remember well how excited Mom was, the day she was a able to get us children vaccinated.

    I caught all the childhood diseases and was grievously ill with each. Were it within my power, I would ensure that no child ever had to suffer with those diseases as I did. I am glad that so many people posting here were lucky to get off far more lightly than I did, but please let us not lose sight of the fact that many of these diseases, even if not usually fatal, could carry serious, sometimes permanent consequences.

    Reply
    1. anglosvizzera

      I’m sure plenty of people do agree with the concept of vaccination, but they would rather have safe ones than ones where the risk may outweigh the benefits.

      A lot of the information that tells us how wonderful vaccines are is not always accurate. Each vaccine has to be evaluated on its own for risk versus benefit as some of the vaccines really aren’t worth bothering with (eg mumps, which is mild in children but the vaccine protection is seemingly short-lived).

      As for the ‘safer’ acellular pertussis (whooping cough) vaccine that is currently in use, it is apparent that any protection afforded by it is also often short-lived and it seems to increase susceptibility to ‘para-pertussis’ (so diseases similar to pertussis anyway.) It is also full of aluminium (as are many others).

      With both of the above examples, we may be trading protection from diseases in the short-term for more problematic conditions such as those that may be triggered as a result of cumulative aluminium toxicity, for example, autoimmune diseases, Multiple Sclerosis, Alzheimer’s Disease, ASD/autism – all of which may have aluminium toxicity as a causative factor. Not always of course, but it’s looking increasingly as if it may be linked to many cases.

      Reply
    2. Joe

      To: The Old Curmudgeon::

      I think if you do a little googling, you’ll find that the 1918 “flu” epidemic was really a pneumonia epidemic. And we had no antibiotics then. It was also under a scenario (WW I) never likely to happen again, with sickly, malnourished troops returning home on crowded ships and trains from all over the world, to an equally sickly, malnourished home country.

      The protection from the whooping cough (pertussis) vaccine wears off quickly, The whole cell DPT vaccine was responsible for many serious injuries and deaths, especially in children under 2. The newer DTaP vaccine is less reactive, but also less effective.

      Regarding “polio,” you might want to read the book The Moth in the Iron Lung : A Biography of Polio. “Poliomyelitis” essentially means “inflammation of the gray matter of the spinal cord.” And the vast majority of these cases (going back to were caused by toxic chemicals, such as lead arsenates, mercury powders, etc. which were used to control pests (in orchards, fields, etc.) and to treat digestive problems. The term “poliomyelitis” was routinely used to describe the infantile paralysis outbreaks of the time, well before the polio virus was discovered. There’s much more to the story, but it’s very likely that your mother and grandfather’s “poliomyelitis” was caused by chemical poisoning, not the virus.

      In fact, the increasing outbreaks of AFM (acute flaccid myelitis) that you read about today,, and virtually indistinguishable from poliomyelitis, may also be caused by toxic chemicals, too. Another suspect is Enterovirus D68 (polio is also an enterovirus), but it can’t be found in the spinal fluids of all cases of AFM. I lean towards a toxin of some sort,(perhaps an ingredient of a vaccine) not a virus.

      With all that said, I think you should have the right to receive any vaccine you want. On the other hand, I think all parents should also have the same right to refuse a vaccine. There should be no such thing as a mandatory vaccination. Just like there should be no such thing as a mandatory invasive medical procedure, drug, etc.

      History should remind us of the potential horrors that can result from such thinking.

      Reply
      1. Gary Ogden

        Joe: I would add that independent research concerning adverse events, which has never been done, and large comparison studies of the health status of vaccinated vs. unvaccinated should be done. Thus parents would be able to give or refuse fully-informed consent, which none are able to now. Some pediatricians in the U.S. will boot out parents who merely ask to see the package insert, such is the state of medical fascism.

    3. AhNotepad

      The Old Curmudgeon, the childhood diseases for which vaccines are recommended,ratehr than getting rid of the diseases are displacing them from an age where they would have been no problem, to an age when they can be a serious problem. In the case of your family it would have been better to put all the effort that is going into making vaccines, into establishing if and why your family seemed to be at a disadvantage. There is much direct damage caused by vaccines.

      Reply
    4. Dr. John H

      Old Curmudgeon,
      The suffering you describe is real. Is vaccination then the solution? The answer is no. Add up all the vaccine caused issues such as: death, permanent disability, chronic illness, and reduced immunity to fend off diseases such as cancer and it’s not hard to see that vaccines cause more harm than good. “Sick” is the new “healthy” and vaccines are a big part of that.

      There are non toxic treatments that do make a difference, but they never get into the mainstream discussion because those in power don’t profit from them.

      Reply
    5. goransjoberg2015

      You are right – it is important not to lose the perspective.

      Though, me and my brother, with most children in our surroundings, passed 70 years ago, as far as I know, all these childhood diseases with only family care and without dire consequences.

      Now reading an archeologic book about our old history, some thousands years ago it is evident that infant and child mortality in those times was just huge for various more or less unknown reasons. Here I believe in Suzanne Humphries’ research, looking back a couple of hundred years, pointing to the importance of the living conditions on health and especially of the sanitation levels, especially the drinking water, as the most important ones for the improvement of the survival rates and where vaccination is a marginal one at best.

      But how little we know about the details!

      Reply
  84. elizabethhart

    On the subject of aluminium in vaccines, the Australian Government Department of Health publication ‘Questions about vaccination’* notes: “There is no evidence that the small amount of aluminium salts contained in vaccines causes any long-term harm…Aluminium salts have been added to some vaccines, in small amounts, for about 60 years. A recent review of all the available studies of diphtheria, tetanus and pertussis (whooping cough) vaccines that contain aluminium found no evidence that the aluminium salts cause any serious or long-term harm.”
    (*Currently accessible via this link: https://www.health.gov.au/resources/publications/questions-about-vaccination )

    The ‘recent review’ cited to justify the safety of aluminium-adjuvanted vaccine products is Tom Jefferson et al’s ‘Adverse events after immunization with aluminium-containing DTP vaccines: systematic review of the evidence’, The Lancet Infectious Diseases 2004;4:84-90.

    In their review Jefferson et al say: “We found no evidence that aluminium salts in vaccines cause any serious or long-lasting adverse events.”

    However, Jefferson et al also admit that “Overall, the methodological quality of included studies was low. Few reports gave details of the randomisation process, allocation concealment, reasons for withdrawals, or strategies to deal with them in analysis. Inconsistencies in reporting, lack of clarity on numerators and denominators, variability of outcome definitions, and lack of outcome definitions led to much loss of data.”

    In their abstract, Jefferson et al conclude: “Despite a lack of good-quality evidence we do not recommend that any further research on this topic is undertaken.”

    I suggest that Jefferson et al’s 2004 systematic review on aluminium and (DTP) vaccine safety is scientifically unsound and should not be relied upon to justify the safety of the many aluminium-adjuvanted vaccine products and revaccinations on the current schedule.

    Jefferson et al admit that “Overall, the methodological quality of included studies was low”, and that there was “a lack of good-quality evidence”. In my opinion, Jefferson et al should have concluded there was not sufficient evidence to come to conclusions about the safety of aluminium in vaccine products, and that further research was needed on this subject. Instead, Jefferson et al recommended against any further research on this topic, a bizarre recommendation which has had far-reaching effects.

    It is extremely concerning that the justification for the safety of all the aluminium-adjuvanted vaccine products and revaccinations on the Australian National Immunisation Program Schedule is resting on the conclusions of what I suggest is Jefferson et al’s scientifically unsound 2004 Lancet Infectious Diseases systematic review.

    This is an important matter as there are now 12 aluminium-adjuvanted vaccine injections for children on the taxpayer-funded and coercive National Immunisation Program Schedule (impacted by the No Jab, No Pay law), with an additional three doses of aluminium-adjuvanted vaccine for children in South Australia (i.e. the GlaxoSmithKline Bexsero meningococcal B vaccine product), making a total of 15 aluminium-adjuvanted vaccine injections for children in South Australia. (For a detailed list of aluminium-adjuvanted vaccine products on the Australian schedule, see Reference 1 in my email to Professor Kristine Macartney, Director, National Centre for Immunisation Research & Surveillance, challenging questionable claims for the safety of aluminium-adjuvanted vaccine products. Note that my email to Kristine Macartney has not been acknowledged, i.e. the usual lack of accountability citizens have come to expect in Australia, we are treated with contempt here: https://elizabethhart.files.wordpress.com/2019/05/gmail-questionable-claims-for-the-safety-of-aluminium-adjuvanted-vaccine-products-email-to-professor-kristine-macartney-ncirs.pdf )

    At this time we have no idea of the long-term cumulative effects of all the ever-increasing number of aluminium-adjuvanted vaccine products and revaccinations on the schedule, and the additional doses of the GSK Bexsero meningococcal B vaccine product on the South Australian schedule, this is an experiment that is underway in the community, without ‘informed consent’.

    It is also a matter for concern that Jefferson et al’s 2004 review, which is influencing Australia’s taxpayer-funded and coercive No Jab, No Pay vaccination policy, is not open access to the public, but has been published behind the paywall of The Lancet Infectious Diseases journal.

    Reply
    1. AhNotepad

      Despite their statement, there must be some serius problem as the Cochrane/Gates conspiacy has said there is no need for further research.

      Reply
    2. Gary Ogden

      elizabethhart: Thank you very much for all the good work you are doing. I better understand now how the AAHS adjuvant can be so dangerous, having watched Suzanne Humphries 2017 presentation concerning Al adjuvants. It turns out that Merck was using AAHS all along in their DTP (whose appalling safety record in use was the impetus for multiple lawsuits and the 1986 NCVIA, which transferred liability from manufacturers to taxpayers), while labelling it as aluminum hydroxide, but neglected to notify governments until much later that it was actually AAHS. This is a compound which, unlike other Al compounds, cannot be quantified in the dose. It can vary as much as six-fold or more. My own hometown newspaper highlighted this fact in a story on December 3, 1984, “Orange Juice Cans Have More Accurate Labels.” This may be one of the key factors in the terrible injuries and deaths from Gardakil-some are getting whopping doses of this neurotoxin. Today, that same newspaper would likely vehemently deny ever printing this information!

      Reply
      1. elizabethhart

        Gary, in regards to aluminium and vaccine safety, is it not astounding that Jefferson et al’s 2004 LID review concluded “Despite a lack of good-quality evidence we do not recommend that any further research on this topic is undertaken.”?!?!

        Also consider this promotion for Jefferson et al’s highly questionable review, published on WebMD in January 2004: ‘Aluminium in Vaccines Poses No Harm’: https://www.webmd.com/children/vaccines/news/20040129/aluminum-in-vaccines-poses-no-harm#1

        Remember that in their review, Jefferson et al admit “Overall, the methodological quality of included studies was low. Few reports gave details of the randomisation process, allocation concealment, reasons for withdrawals, or strategies to deal with them in analysis. Inconsistencies in reporting, lack of clarity on numerators and denominators, variability of outcome definitions, and lack of outcome definitions led to much loss of data.”

        But this is how the review is reported in the WebMD article: “After scouring through all the available medical data, researchers in Rome say there is no evidence that aluminum — contained within the combined diphtheria, tetanus and pertussis vaccine commonly known as DTP and routinely given to children — poses any serious or long-term side effects. “Scare stories on aluminum-containing vaccines are not supported by evidence,” lead researcher Tom Jefferson, MD, of Cochrane Vaccines Field in Italy, tells WebMD.”

        And Paul Offit, probably the world’s foremost vaccine product promoter, is on-hand to endorse Jefferson et al’s review, saying: “This is a very thorough, thoughtful review of the subject, and the findings don’t surprise me at all,” Offit tells WebMD. “Aluminum-containing vaccines have been used safely for decades.”

        A “very thorough, thoughtful review of the subject”?! Really?!

        In my opinion, Jefferson et al’s review was ‘garbage in / garbage out’…worse than useless. How did this get past peer review at The Lancet Infectious Diseases?

      2. AhNotepad

        “Aluminium in vaccines can do no harm”. Hmmm………THE SHEEP, THE SHEEP, REMEMBER THE SHEEP. There was a time we had “Spanish flu”, now we have “Spanish sheep autism”, they will say the cure is a vaccine no doubt. Since the Lancet, has, (or did have) an editor (or simiar member of staff) on the board of GSK, objective facts are likely to be rare.

      3. Gary Ogden

        elizabethhart: Right you are. Peer review is commonly little more than an endorsement of the status quo, as Dr. Kendrick explains in “Doctoring Data.” Dr. James Lyons-Weiler wrote a post this week on autoimmune encephalopathy and aluminum hydroxide, but it appears that AAHS is as dangerous or worse. This may be one of the reasons we are seeing an increase in violence among schoolchildren here in the U.S.

  85. anglosvizzera

    Further to Professor Exley’s comment about the quantity of adjuvant in vaccines, Dr Suzanne Humphries has a great video, regarding aluminium adjuvants and how some vials are mislabelled as regards the actual adjuvant in it, contain more or less adjuvant than others and so on…explains how the latter occurs during manufacture…and how really it’s a game of Russian Roulette as to which vial anyone may receive. She also touches on ‘degradation products’ in the MMR:

    “Merck’s Dirty Little Secret” – https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qbnqO_vJVOk

    Reply
    1. Göran Sjöberg

      All this is very scary for a normal thinking person.

      Dr Suzanne Humphries is for sure the “greatest” vaccine “sceptic” – but how can she “survive”?
      Prof. Peter C Gøtzsche criticized the Cochran HPT vaccine review as flawed and lost his job at the hospital and was removed as the head of the Cochran review process.

      The pharmaceutical business is certainly one of the dirtiest industries.

      Reply
      1. Jerome Savage

        Goran It seems , it “BUYS” more members of congress than any other industry – biggest budget to influence decision making in favour of the Pharma / Chemical conglomerates.

  86. Maggie F

    I was shocked to read of the disastrous effects of childhood illnesses back in the early 20th century. Maybe some of this was due to poor nutrition, damp and often cold houses, overwork, many people sharing accommodation etc. Nowadays many of the factors which would have given rise to the poor outcomes have been illiminated. I was born during the 2nd World War and despite having had the majority of childhood illnesses suffered no obvious side effects. My Mother was an avid reader of medical research and concluded that vaccination had its own hazards and I was not vaccinated at all. Furthermore she was equally skeptical about the efficacy of antibiotics used to treat everyday ailments, like sore throat or a mild raise in temperature etc, which a good diet, rest, warmth would resolve in seven days or less. I am 75 years old have no allergies, have had no significant health issues ever and I take no medication and never have. It maybe good fortune, but I suspect not. Following the guidelines laid down by my Mother in my childhood, I eat sensibly, take regular exercise, have maintained a healthy weight and keep to a consistent bed time. My husband, 79, our son 53 and our daughter 52 all have adopted these simple and effective practices and to date we are all fit with good immune systems and we are more energetic than most of our contemporaries.
    I recognise that in some circumstances vaccination assists, but good diet, exercise and rest have an enormous part to play in protecting against illness. The prevention should not be an emergency sticking plaster. Prevention is the key to good health, avoiding the most obvious hazards and caring for your own body not expecting others to do it for you.

    Reply
  87. Soul

    I had a laugh yesterday watching a new English show. It’s called Mystic Britain. The show seems to be about old practices British people participated in the 1400 hundreds and earlier. What made me chuckling was the shows highlight on the practice of health care workers during the time of the black death. As the shows presenters said, the health care workers did little of benefit to suffering patients and were disliked during the time for their high charges.

    Reminded me of America’s health care system. Somethings don’t change! Well, I’m likely a minority in this opinion but the show gave me a laugh.

    Reply
    1. Janet

      Said witch doctors probably wore those ridiculous bird style masks… to fend off evil spirits and or ‘miasmas’. Often wondered if the snout contained a cloth. dampened a variation of “thieves oil” a mix of several essential oils, reputedly effective in keeping disease at bay. Certainly the name is appropriate !

      Reply
      1. Chris Morriss

        Yes, various ingredients were tried in the ‘snout’: herbs. spices and various aromatic oils.

        No idea if they were effective in any way though.

  88. ShamC

    Great article.
    The very fact that all vaccine manufacturers in the USA are legally protected from any prosecution should ring alarm bells all over the world.
    The US has the highest number vaccines given to babies and children and also dire rates of chronic illness in children.
    All parents of newborns are ‘encouraged’ (coerced) by hospital staff to give their babies a Hepatitis B vaccine. This makes no sense at all. Hep B can only be contracted by drug users sharing contaminated needles or sexual contact.
    The vitamin K shot comes in a black box with a “Warning. Can cause death” label on it.
    It’s also administered to newborns in the US.

    The recent “outbreaks” of the deadly measles have not killed a single person in the US and a large number of those who got the measles were vaccinated in the first place.
    I’m old enough to remember kids at school getting measles and taking a week off school.
    That was it.
    Nobody died.
    Of course I’m also not naive to think that those living in conditions of poverty where hygiene and quality nutrition are absent would not be at a higher risk from something like measles so surely the solution isn’t to throw the MMR vaccine at third world countries like Bill Gates does?
    Clean them up and feed them and they’ll do fine.
    Vaccines make a lot of money and for the vast majority of the life threatening illnesses they claim to eradicate there is fr less to be fearful of than we are led to believe.
    Some simple, UNBIASED research will give you all the answers you need to realize that vaccines are not all they claim to be.
    The fact that we can’t openly talk about their obvious flaws without being lumped together with flat earthers and alien conspiracy theorists is a sad, sad testament to how the Pharmaceutical industry has manipulated the world.

    Reply
    1. Jerome Savage

      U mean this ?
      ” Especially in sheep, this vaccination campaign brought out a new cachectic and neurologic disease with harmful consequences for the ovine industry. This disease is now recognized as the ovine version of the autoimmune/inflammatory syndrome induced by adjuvants (ASIA syndrome) “

      Reply
    1. Aileen

      Also in the HighWire video posted by Elizabeth Hart, above, is an fascinating and horrifying interview (at around 36 minutes) with a research scientist who as a student participated in the phase III Gardasil trials.

      There is also an interview with Professor Chris Exley at 54 minutes.

      Reply
  89. Jerome Savage

    This is one report, extract below, from a mother and journalist on the HPV vaccine currently being rolled out for boys in Ireland. (NB research referred to not identified)
    ” The vaccine doesn’t just prevent cervical cancer. Research illustrates that the vaccine may sharply reduce oral HPV infections that are a major risk factor for oropharyngeal cancer – a type of head and neck cancer. HPV has been strongly linked to a number of other cancers in men and women including cancers of the anus, mouth and throat, vulva, vagina and penis. Australia (who introduced it in 2007) has seen a decrease of more than 50% in rates of pre-cancer of the cervix in the last ten years.

    Clincher number two: The people behind the anti-HPV vaccine movement worldwide – and videos like the one I saw back in 2009 – are most often religious conservatives, pushing the abstinence argument over any scientific, medical address to real health issues. They’re the ones harping on that the vaccine will “only make girls have more sex” This is pretty much the mainstream view along with the notion that vaccines can potentially eliminate all disease – eventuality and anti vaxxers are out to prevent a disease free Shangri la. Just saying !
    https://www.image.ie/amp/life/changed-mind-hpv-vaccine-109284

    Reply
    1. AhNotepad

      Let’s deal with a few myths. I am not a religeous conservative. I don’t see HPV vaccine wil encourage girls to have more sex. I doubt that it may Reduce the risk of oral HPV infection. So that is a major risk factor in oralpharangeal cncer is it? How did they remove the confounding possible factors of smoking and alcohol consumption, or any number of other factors such as tongue piercings, use of nail varnish, aerosols for every conceivable use. Electric air “freshener” dispensers. etc.

      This report is yet another unscientific scratching around at numbers trying to pretend something exists, when there is no evidence.

      “Antibiotics will get rid of diseases”, er, except for those that are now resistant to every available antibiotic. Vaccines will be over prescribed in similar vein, or worse mandated by totally ignorant fools, as is happening.

      Reply
      1. Jerome Savage

        AHN Meg Walker background “studied journalism in the US, got her first magazine job 22 years ago, since in both contract and commercial publishing with focus on food, lifestyle & career stories”
        So an amateur in the medical world, a former anti vaxxer but with a particular interest, as she has flesh in the plot ie a teenage daughter. Why did she change to pro vax ? Obviously the info provided by officialdom & MSM (subtle & unsubtle) pursuaded her. She is no fool & is doing right for her own loved one as far as she is concerned.
        On the australian report, like I said M Walker has not identified it but assuming it’s there, a 50% reduction in certain cancers since the vaccine’s introduction is unlikely to have coincided with a similar reduction in smoking, alcohol consumption, factors such as tongue piercings, use of nail varnish, aerosols, Electric air “freshener” dispensers. etc., in the same period tho it’s possible, but again unlikely.
        U doubt that it may Reduce the risk of oral HPV infection ? Why ?
        Re evidence, how do U kno its “another unscientific scratching around at numbers trying to pretend something exists, when there is no evidence”
        Have U seen the rreport ? No.reference points in the article by the food, lifestyle & career journalist.
        U certainly hav a point re antibiotics & yes, vaccines could go the same way.
        Polio is the indicator towards a potential Shangri La. People & medics dream, and as stated, the dream is the disease free world. Pharmaceutical giants WILL take advantage of such aspirations & without the risk factor, no liability they will go head first for profit, market share, etc as sure as Billy is a goat and that is frightening. The holy grail of a disease free world is not shared by realists, like ur good self but consumerism demands it & the dream bubble must not b burst.
        (I presume Meg Walker BTW is not dependent on big pharma advertising)
        My laboured point is that the pro vax lobby are winning the argument hands down.

      2. Gary Ogden

        Jerome Savage: They most certainly are not winning. Thus the censorship of virtually all media, print, broadcast, and online, of any content questioning vaccine safety. They have lost control of the narrative. Many more people now are aware of the real risks the vaccine schedule carries. Thus, also, mandates. Mandatory medical intervention in only healthy people. It is Orwellian. It is so alarming that we are facing societal collapse, I would guess within a few decades.. The schools are the canary in the coal mine (read Anne Dachel’s posts on what is happening in schools at ageofautism.org). Military recruitment, another (according to the Pentagon, only 29% of the prime recruiting age-group, the 18-24-year-olds, are fit for service).

      3. Sasha

        Also, the demographic of the group questioning the current vaccination schedule is different as compared to general population.

      4. AhNotepad

        Jerome, I see your point as thorough rather than laboured. I agree the pro-vax is doing rather too well, despite sound opposition science. It’s as if a belief in a “better” world trumps the acceptance of reality. Here is Andrew Wakefields latest video, which coincidentally explains a reasoning for the presence, and possible benefits of diseases.

      5. Jerome Savage

        AHN & Gary looking at the Kennedy video makes me fearful. Looks like gangsters are in charge. Children are expendable it seems. Absolutely astonishing.

      6. Tom Morgan

        I would urge everyone to read RFK Jr’s response to his own family’s critical letter.
        https://childrenshealthdefense.org/news/americans-can-handle-an-open-discussion-on-vaccines-rfk-jr-responds-to-criticism-from-his-family/
        I believe his response is a devastating indictment of the US FDA and CDC relationship with big pharma and answers his family’s criticism in a way that is difficult deflect. I would also suggest that people browse the Children’s Health Defense website… It has a lot of very interesting info w.r.t. vaccines and big pharma.

    2. elizabethhart

      There are many uncertainties about the HPV vaccine products. For example, unnaturally high antibody titres are induced by HPV vaccination, is this a good thing?

      In a review paper published in 2010, Ian Frazer, a co-inventor of the technology enabling the HPV vaccines, states: “HPV immunization induces peak geometric mean antibody titers that are 80- to 100-fold higher than those observed following natural infection [19]. Furthermore, after 18 months, mean vaccine-induced antibody titers remain 10- to 16-fold higher than those recorded with natural infection [19], and these levels appear to be preserved over time, suggesting that immunization may provide long-term protection against infection…” (See page S9.)

      HPV ‘immunization’ inducing antibody titres that are 80- to 100-fold higher than those observed following natural infection seems to be a very unnatural response.

      Is this a good thing? Does anybody know?

      Reference:
      Ian H Frazer. Measuring serum antibody to human papillomavirus following infection or vaccination. Gynecologic Oncology 118 (2010) S8-S11.

      Reply
      1. Jerome Savage

        Thanks Elizabeth
        Frazer absolutely links the PV with cervical cancer and seems very pleased with anti HPV vaccine in this 2 minute video 2015.

        “If there are no PV infection there are no cervical cancers” he says in following.

      2. elizabethhart

        Jerome, re Ian Frazer’s definitive statement “Cervical cancer is caused by human papillomavirus infection. If we prevent human papillomavirus infection we prevent cervical cancer”.

        Information on this webpage contradicts that statement: ‘What do we know about HPV negative cervical cancer’: http://medicalrepublic.com.au/know-hpv-negative-cervical-cancer/5616

        Consider for example: “Dr Suzanne Hyne, a gynaecological pathologist at Douglass Hanly Moir Pathology, said the majority of cervical cancers, about 80%, were squamous in origin, and most, if not all, were HPV-related. “The majority of adenocarcinomas, which made up around 20% of all cervical cancers, were also HPV-related,” she said. However, evidence was emerging that a small proportion of cancers in the adenocarcinoma group were not HPV related. Although they made up only a minority of cases, they may represent a larger group than initially thought, with some experts now believing they could account for 10% of all adenocarcinomas of the cervix. “No one knows for sure,” Dr Hyne said. “It’s probably under-recognised and under-reported at the moment.” The majority of these true HPV negative cancers were gastric mucinous in type, which was included in the WHO classification of female reproductive organ tumours only in 2014.”

        Of course Dr Hyne goes on to downplay the risks – “While it was an evolving field, the recognition of HPV-negative cancers was not cause for alarm, Dr Hyne said.”

        But as Dr Hyne also said “No one knows for sure…It’s probably under-recognised and under-reported at the moment.”

        Comments on the article are also worth a look, some anecdotes…

        Ian Frazer should be careful about making definitive statements such as: “Cervical cancer is caused by human papillomavirus infection. If we prevent human papillomavirus infection we prevent cervical cancer”.

      3. elizabethhart

        Jerome, you say Ian Frazer “seems very pleased with anti HPV vaccine”. Yes, I’m sure you’re right. As co-inventor of the technology enabling the HPV vaccines, Ian Frazer receives royalties from their sale in the developed world.

        Not a lot of people know that, as it’s conflict of interest information that is seldom disclosed in articles featuring Ian Frazer promoting HPV vaccination, see for example this article on the University of Queensland UQ News: ‘Gardasil vaccine to be available for boys in 2013’: https://www.uq.edu.au/news/article/2012/07/gardasil-vaccine-be-available-boys-2013

        However, a disclosure statement was included in an article (or should I say advertorial) by Ian Frazer, published on the university and government-funded The Conversation website in July 2012, coinciding with the time HPV vaccination was announced for boys in Australia. See ‘Catch cancer? No thanks, I’d rather have a shot!’: https://theconversation.com/catch-cancer-no-thanks-id-rather-have-a-shot-7568

        At the time I was more focussed on over-vaccination of pets, and had no beef about HPV vaccination, I didn’t know much about it. However, upon reading Frazer’s article, I was astonished to read this statement: “Through sexual activity, most of us will get infected with the genital papillomaviruses that can cause cancer. Fortunately, most of us get rid of them between 12 months to five years later without even knowing we’ve had the infection. Even if the infection persists, only a few individuals accumulate enough genetic mistakes in the virus-infected cell for these to acquire the properties of cancer cells.”

        I was astonished that mass vaccination was implemented against a virus that Frazer indicated wouldn’t cause problems for most people.

      4. Jerome Savage

        Thanks Elizabeth
        I find when I bring up the topic of vaccines with acquaintances, I get cornered & am mildly assaulted with verbal missiles & emotional incendiaries if I voice any doubt. The only comment that might provoke a halt to the onslaught is where I mention alum & /or mercury vax content.The resulting ceasefire follows a recognition that this can’t be right & allows for some retreat from the previously protracted position. (Deep intake of breath) Again the public need sound bites to counteract what appears to be a vaccine tsunami.
        Following appears to be a worthwhile report
        https://globenewswire.com/news-release/2019/03/18/1756466/0/en/HPV-Vaccine-Mandate-Ill-Advised-States-Association-of-American-Physicians-and-Surgeons-AAPS.html

      5. elizabethhart

        Jerome, there is much fear-mongering about HPV and cancer. Misinformation about HPV and cancer risk abounds, much of it emanating from the so-called ‘scientific’ community.

        For example, in his article promoting HPV vaccination[1], HPV vaccine entrepreneur Professor Ian Frazer definitively states cervical cancer “kills over 250,000 women world wide every year” and describes cervical cancer as the “second most common cause of cancer death in women”, but provides no evidence to support these statements.

        The use of these alarming statistics is highly questionable in countries where the risk of cervical cancer is very low.

        Professor Frazer’s alarmist annual 250,000 death rate is not relevant to Australian girls and women. Published statistics indicate that an estimated 245 deaths were attributed to cancer of the cervix in Australia in 2014.[2]

        The risk of cervical cancer has been steadily decreasing in Australia. Between 1982 and 2014 cervical cancer was one of the cancers showing the greatest percentage-point decrease in incidence, from 14.2 to 7.0 per 100,000.[3] In the same period, the age standardised mortality rate of cervical cancer decreased from 5.2 to 1.8 per 100,000.[4] Cervical cancer is listed as 19th on a list of the estimated 20 most common causes of death from cancers for females in 2010[5] and 2014[6], which is at odds with Professor Frazer’s statement that cervical cancer is the “second most common cause of cancer death in women”.

        Even a report on HPV vaccination in Australia acknowledges the low risk of cancer, saying “Australia has one of the lowest rates of incidence and mortality from cervical cancer in the world.[7] In 2008, there were 9 cases of cervical cancer per 100,000 women of all ages, and in 2007, the age-standardised mortality rate from cervical cancer was 2 deaths per 100,000.[8] These are the lowest rates observed to date. Cervical cancer in Australia now occurs predominantly in unscreened or under-screened women.”[9] Which raises the question – why did Australia implement mass HPV vaccination in 2007 when the disease threat was low, screening would still have to take place, and the long-term effects of HPV vaccination were unknown? This expensive initiative also took funding away from other pressing medical problems. For example Gardasil vaccination of boys and girls in 2013/2014 cost over $97 million[10], a very questionable expenditure, but a lucrative windfall for bioCSL, Professor Ian Frazer[11], and the University of Queensland.[12] These parties benefit from royalties from the sale of HPV vaccines in developed countries.

        References:
        1. Ian Frazer. Catch cancer? No thanks, I’d rather have a shot! The Conversation, 10 July 2012.
        2. See page xiii, Estimated mortality from cancer in 2014. Cancer in Australia: An overview 2014.
        3. See page 20, Cancer in Australia: An overview 2014.
        4. See page 52, Cancer in Australia: An overview 2014.
        5. See page xi, Mortality from cancer in 2010. Cancer in Australia: An overview 2012. Australian Institute of Health and Welfare.
        6. See page xiii, Estimated mortality from cancer in 2014. Cancer in Australia: An overview 2014.
        7. International Agency for Research on Cancer. CANCERMondial. 2012. (Accessed 11 July 2012). As quoted in NCIRS Evaluation of the National Human Papillomavirus Vaccination Program. Final Report. 28 August 2014.
        8. Australian Institute of Health and Welfare (AIHW). Cervical screening in Australia 2009-2010. Cancer series no. 67. Cat. no. CAN 63. Canberra: AIHW; 2012. As quoted in NCIRS Evaluation of the National Human Papillomavirus Vaccination Program. Final Report. 28 August 2014.
        9. NCIRS Evaluation of the National Human Papillomavirus Vaccination Program. Final Report. 28 August 2014.
        10. The National HPV Vaccination Program is a school-based program provided under the National Immunisation Program (NIP). Vaccinations provided under the NIP are free for eligible cohorts. The current contract with bioCSL for supply of Gardasil for the National HPV Vaccination Program is for both the male and female programs for 2013 and 2014, at a total cost of $97,678,540.96 (GST Inclusive). Senate Community Affairs Committee. Answers to Estimates Questions on Notice. Health and Ageing Portfolio. Additional Estimates 13 & 15 February 2013. Question: E13-172.
        11. “Ian Frazer as co-inventor of the technology enabling the HPV vaccines receives royalties from their sale in the developed world.” Disclosure statement on Ian Frazer’s article Catch cancer? No thanks, I’d rather have a shot! The Conversation, 10 July 2012.
        12. “The Merck vaccine, Gardasil, was commercially released in 2006. Under the licensing arrangements, milestone and royalty payments from the sale of the Merck and GSK vaccines will be payable to UniQuest and will ultimately flow back to UQ (University of Queensland) and the researchers (Ian Frazer).” Group of Eight Australia. Module 4: Intellectual property and commercialisation. Case Study: Gardasil – an example of university licensing.

      6. Jerome Savage

        Elizabeth Hart
        Thanks for very informative & well presented discourse. I passed on your commentary to a family member with a teenage boy now destined for the vaccine.Many pro vaccine articles quote Australian statistics to support their argument. I wonder what your thoughts are on following article by Professor Mary Horgan, First Woman President of the Royal College of Physicians of Ireland.
        https://www.irishtimes.com/opinion/why-boys-need-to-be-vaccinated-for-hpv-1.3996801

      7. AhNotepad

        Jerome, the giveaway is right at the beginning, “to eradicade cancers for future generations”.

        For all the decades of so called “research”, the “health” industry as a whole is no nearer to curing cancer. Others are, and have, but they are attacked and even killed by big pharma. This will be no different all the promises of a one shot will provide lifetime immunity crap will be trotted out, just as it was for measles. What is the current state? To maintain the antibody level considerred adequate it requires three shots PER YEAR!!!! (See Andrew Wakefield’s videos). Coupled with the use of AAHS (see Suzanne Humphries – “Merck’s Dirty Little Secret”) you get the picture.

        The only reason necessary for HPV vaccination is to keep the money rolling in.

      8. Brian Steere

        @ AhNotepad
        I extend further your point to say that a captive revenue stream is an act of power over a captive (medicalised) population. To pursuit of power, money is but a tool not an end. Greedy people are useful tools, to the wielding of power. I don’t like to accept such power as true for it is sustained by deceit and coercion.

  90. John Stone

    The BMA’s chair, Chaand Nagpaul, takes up the “anti-vax” abuse rhetoric in the association’s new house mag ‘The Doctor’ in their special “Fake News” edition.

    The Doctor is distributed every 4 weeks as a supplement to BMJ.

    Reply
      1. Joe

        To Dr. Kendrick:

        I would rather have questions that can’t be answered than answers that can’t be questioned. Richard Feynman.

  91. chris c

    Completely off topic (well it’s about CVD (grin))

    http://high-fat-nutrition.blogspot.com/2019/07/on-belief-structures-in-lipidology-2.html

    Peter at Hyperlipid (NOT the Attia) always comes up with good stuff

    “Is it conceivable that cardiological dietary advice represents the exact opposite of the correct approach? That it would actively worsen the problem it is aiming to ameliorate?

    Yep. But we knew that anyway.

    Increasing linoleic acid in the diet is undoubtedly a facilitator of the generation of KODA-CP and the activation of the subsequent cascade goes a long way to explain the Sydney Diet Heart Study and the Minnesota Coronary Experiment. People died. From corn oil.

    I’ll stop now.”

    Reply
  92. mmec7

    Interesting research on eliminating heavy metals, especially aluminium build up, by Dr Exley – Silicon : https://www.hippocraticpost.com/nursing/why-everyone-should-drink-silicon-rich-mineral-water/
    I was aware of Dr Exley’s research some two odd years ago, and since then always use Volvic water, Silicon 32%. Volvic is under the Danone umbrella (not Nesle as some have thought.)
    One can also purchase Silice. Silice is 99.4%. Laboratoire Biofloral, France. http://www.biofloral.fr

    Reply
    1. AhNotepad

      JDPatten, thanks for the link. It suits my beliefs down to the ground. I believe most interventions are harmful in most cases. They may appear to be beneficial, but we are told about the benefits, rarely the problems.

      Reply
  93. mmec7

    AhNotepad, did you read the summary by Dr Exley ? Exley speaks of Volvic water and Silicon : Silicon rich mineral water. His research finds that the Silicon in the Volvic water removes heavy metals from the body, and references aluminium.

    Reply
    1. anglosvizzera

      As far as I’m aware, Professor Exley’s research is only regarding aluminium and its affinity for silicic acid found in suitable forms in mineral waters containing 30ppm (30mg/litre) or more of silica. Then the aluminium binds with the silicic acid and is safely excreted through the normal channels. There is no mention that this protocol will have any detoxifying effect on other unwanted metals in the human body – for that there are other approaches, I understand.

      Reply
      1. mmec7

        anglosvizzera – Quote : “Professor Exley’s research is only regarding aluminium and its affinity for silicic acid found in suitable forms in mineral waters containing 30ppm (30mg/litre) or more of silica.”
        Correct. Then in the comments section, there is passing reference to this mineral as being good for health in general, and a glancing reference to mercury and (possibly) other heavy metals. Further discourse mentions 47% and more, with one commentator speaking of a minimum of 35% being the minimum for efficacy – which may indicate that my Volvic 32% as somwhat too minimal for efficacy !

      2. Gary Ogden

        anglosvizzera: Correct. Silica binds to aluminum. Heavy metals are typically removed through chelation. As far as I know, this is mainstream medicine, and the compound used , by IV, is Calcium Disodium EDTA. Pills are available to supplement this process. Someone correct me if I’m wrong. Writing this entirely from memory.

  94. Anna M

    I suspect that these diseases could likely be safely managed by simple support. An example is dysentery, which kills 3rd world kids but could be managed with electrolytes and fluids. I bet a more severe case of measles or pertussis might require a couple days in hospital with IV fluids, IV vitamin C and injections or infusions of vitamins A and D.

    Reply
    1. Sasha

      It’s also possible that if measles vaccination (or any other) was to be discontinued it would cause an initial spike in deaths and long-term effects until the population readjusts. But probably not to the extent that we see in malnourished third world populations.

      Reply
  95. Anna M

    So when the westerners came to both north and south America there was huge die-off of the Amerindians from measles and flu. We are now deliberately replicating that scenario for our future. Well, not the flu as that isn’t even effective and is constantly changing.

    Reply
    1. Dr. Malcolm Kendrick Post author

      Well, there was a huge die-off from something. Measles, in a measles naive population, is extremely deadly – worse than Ebola perhaps. However, it does seem that measles, as a disease, had been gradually attenuating in the West. It is not just infective agents that adapt. Humans also adapt to infectious agents. The Spanish flu epidemic killed tens of millions – possibly hundreds of millions. No flu outbreak has done anything like that since.

      Reply
      1. David Bailey

        Malcolm, I am curious as to how that adaption works – I mean does it mean that Europeans suffered a 90% die-back at some point in their past so that only the most resistant could survive?

      2. Dr. Malcolm Kendrick Post author

        I would imagine that was one way. Also epigentics. Those who were fit and strong could probably survive almost any infection, they would then pass on resistance to the next generation – I would imagine.

      3. AhNotepad

        David Bailey, it would have had to be 97% as that seems to be the magic number. This is confirmed as I now notice 3% is often quoted as a low risk factor, of course leaving the getting-to-be-discredited 97% out of the conversation. You know the type of thing, “97% of ****** scientists/doctors/researches/engineers etc agree……..”. I ask, “why 97%?” Why is that more valid than any other figure? But it seems to be believed to be so. An appeal to “authority” and a statement that this is an answer that can’t be questioned.

      4. Gary Ogden

        David Bailey: As I understand it, measles in humans originated from rinderpest, a disease of cattle. This would put it far back in the mists of time, to the period when cattle were domesticated. Not likely the fatality rate would have been as high as 90% even then, although this is possible. In a naive population, though, a novel pathogen can indeed produce a high fatality rate.

      5. AhNotepad

        mmec7, Chris Exley might have mentioned “silicon”, but in common with many other elements it does not exist in elemental form in nature, as I understand it. It will mostly exist as silicon dioxide.

      6. Janet Love

        But are we SURE the Spanish ‘Flu was indeed influenza and alone, or was there something else tagging along for the ride?
        Besides, Europe was replete with malnourished vulnerable troops all fertile breeding incubators for whatever pathogens there were floating around… And they took them home to meet the Families!

      7. AhNotepad

        I admit to bias, but I suspect it was the treatment rather than the disease. Apart from the Europeans who lived with their animals and caught their diseases, then took them to the Americas and infected inexperienced populations, only the black death caused such huge numbers of deaths, and that was before Bazalgette develpoed the idea of how to stop people drinking sewage water.

        As Andrew Wakefield pointed out, the inhumane beings in the US took the recently banned measles vaccine took it to infect the Yanomami, just to see what happens. Oops! Huge quantities of people died, – from the treatment.

      8. Soul

        I’m chuckling a bit posting this, but have seen this mention in a book that poses many questions about the Spanish Flu. I guess possibly the TB vaccine of the time could cause lung problems, similar to problems those with the Spanish Flu developed. As the author has to say “According to this paper (Dr Rosenow’s) published in the Mayo Collected Papers of the world – renowned Mayo Clinic, According to this paper the vaccinated guinea pigs primarily suffered severe damage in their lungs – a typical symptom of tuberculosis and other diseases of the Spanish Flu.”

        http://www.proliberty.com/observer/20030723.htm

        excerpt:

        ….A doctor at the Mayo Clinic, Dr. E.C. Rosenow, recorded in the Mayo Collected Papers, Vol. II, p. 92, that he found “the vaccine serums injected into guinea pigs tended to localize in the lungs.” Even the Surgeon-General of the U.S. Army innocently recorded in a 1918-1919 report that “for all officers and enlisted men, Americans and native troops in all countries where United States troops were serving, tuberculosis of the lungs was the leading cause for discharge; and among American troops at home and abroad there were 31,106 hospital admissions for pulmonary tuberculosis, with 1,114 deaths, in the period of this country’s participation in the World War.”

        Anne Riley Hale wrote in her book, Medical Voodoo, 1935, p. 38:

        “As everyone knows, the world has never witnessed such an orgy of vaccination and inoculation of every description as was inflicted by army-camp doctors upon soldiers of the World War. Join with this the fact that the amazing disease and death toll among them occurred among ‘the picked men of the nation’ – supposedly the most robust, resistant class of all, who presumably brought to the service each a good pair of lungs, since they must have passed a rigid physical examination by competent medical men…the highest death rate from tuberculosis, and the greatest discharge from the army because of tuberculosis, were among American troops in the camps at home who never got across the seas and whose disabilities could not therefore be chargeable to gas-bombs and trench warfare.”…

      9. David Bailey

        Malcolm,
        I am not clear as to just how many generations epigenetic changes last. They only put tags on the DNA, not change what it codes for. This makes me wonder if humanity will retain its resistance to variants of flu (or other pandemics) indefinitely.

      10. Soul

        To update my post about questions a book I have on the Spanish Flu, I miswrote. The book poses many questions that as with anything of this nature should be looked into. As someone pointed out to me a TB vaccine didn’t come along till the 1920s. As the books author and others actually mention “vaccine serum” was the problem. I’m not entirely sure what that was, but it’s something that was questioned in the past.

        The book mentions that up to 24 vaccinations could be given to a person at that time. Vaccinations were common not only for soldiers but toward the end of the great war vaccine companies successfully pushed for the public(s) to mass vaccinate since the soldiers were soon to be coming home and could spread diseases.

        An item I’ve found interesting and one of these days I’m likely to try and find out more on how to do with how did the Spanish flu spread. I know little on this. I have read a couple mentions about the US Navy conducting two tests to find out how the Spanish flu spread. Basically what the Navy did was take volunteer prisoners, one group on the east coast and one on the west, and exposed the prisoners to those with active Spanish flu. It was mentioned that the prisoners had been screened beforehand making sure they had not experienced the Spanish flu earlier. After doing all they could to exposure the two prison groups to Spanish flu patients, their results were none of the volunteers developed the Spanish flu.

        The only other mention on disease spread I’ve read was author Eleanora McBean account. She was a young girl during the Spanish flu outbreak. She later went onto become an anti-vaccine author. McBean’s account her experience during the great flu outbreak can be found on the internet. She basically wrote that she and her family avoided the vaccines of the time. They did not develop the Spanish flu. Her parents worked to help those in their neighborhood suffering from the deadly flu that was killing so many.

        Lots of questions in the book. Don’t know if they are right or not, but interesting reading that asks good questions in my opinion.

  96. shirley3349

    Also available in this country is Gerolsteiner naturally sparkling mineral water. This comes from a spring in the Eifel volcanic region of Germany near the Luxembourg border. The silica content is advertised at 40.2 mg/l.

    Reply
  97. Martin Back

    Flight attendant, mother of 3, dies after contracting measles

    Amitai was vaccinated against the disease as a child, but like many people her age [43] around the world, she received only one dose of the vaccine. She was otherwise healthy before contracting measles…

    One dose of the measles vaccine has been found to be about 93% effective. In 1989, children in the United States started receiving two doses, which is about 97% effective, according to the CDC.

    It’s not known why most people who get measles recover fully while others have devastating complications.

    About 1 out of every 1,000 children who gets measles will develop encephalitis, according to the CDC. This can lead to convulsions and leave a child deaf or with an intellectual disability.

    Additionally, 1 or 2 out of 1,000 US children who get measles will die from it. Worldwide, the illness is fatal in 1 or 2 out of every 100 children.

    Before the measles vaccine was introduced in the early 1960s, an estimated 400 to 500 people in the United States died of the disease each year, 48,000 were hospitalized, and 1,000 developed encephalitis, according to the CDC.

    Reply
    1. JDPatten

      Martin,
      As I’ve mentioned before, the viral challenge of measles to your immune system can leave you open to any sort of opportunistic infection that happens to be around and ready. The fact that you would fight such infections off without noticing under ordinary challenge-free circumstances makes it seem as though measles itself is the infection causing encephalitis, deafness, death, etc. Is enough known about the whole complex to differentiate actual causes? I doubt it.
      A few years ago, the man at Mass Eye & Ear who treated my measles associated ear drum loss of sixty years before explained that the destructive process of measles to my inner ear is continuing to this day as nerve loss, the nice new eardrum notwithstanding. With all his advanced knowledge, he still could not tell me definitively that measles itself is still the responsible factor.

      Reply
      1. Martin Back

        If measles weakens you enough that something else, normally not deadly, now kills you, then it means that measles itself is deadly.

        HIV doesn’t kill you, but the associated opportunistic infections do, that’s why you don’t want to get infected with HIV. The social stigma and nauseating medication is a bonus turn-off.

        Or more facetiously, it’s not the failed parachute that kills you, it’s the impact. Nevertheless, a failed parachute is to be avoided.

      2. Sasha

        This is a false comparison. Cold air, for example, used to kill a lot of weak and the elderly and yet, exposure to cold has lots of benefits for stronger individuals.

    2. AhNotepad

      Martin, any figures from the CDC should be treated with caution. They have claimed 36,000+ deaths in the US every year from flu, but it is nothing like that.

      Reply
      1. Joe

        AhNotepad:

        The CDC doesn’t track flu deaths. They only track flu and pneumonia deaths as a group.

        I think you can probably guess why they do that.

        Plus, less than 16% of all “flu” samples sent to the CDC each year for confirmation ever turn out to be the flu. That is, 84% of them are not the flu but something else..

    1. Gary Ogden

      John: It’s part of the propaganda operation, like all pronouncements from the public health industry. We are in a dark period in human history. Nature Communications has now destroyed all its credibility with: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-019-09959-4
      Response from Dr. Curry at Climate, Etc. Such is the state of Science and science publishing today. The only recent good news I can think of is that, after last Saturday’s events at the Metropolitan Corrections Center in NYC, nobody will any longer trust what our government says. This is very good news indeed.

      Reply
      1. Martin Back

        I don’t see the problem. The abstract of the Nature paper is poorly worded, but seems to be saying that in mainstream media, pro- and anti-anthropogenic global warming views have equal visibility, but in non-mainstream media, the antis get 149% more visibility.

        This hardly comes as a surprise. The non-mainstream media is the haunt of conspiracy theorists, kooks, weirdos, wackos, and those against anything supported by the establishment. Of course the antis will get more visibility.

        Judith Curry poo-poos the methodology of the study, but she doesn’t dispute the findings. In fact, she justifies them, saying “Scientists on the ‘contrarian’ list bring something further to the table: fact checking alarming statements; concerns about research integrity; thinking outside the box and pushing the knowledge frontier of climate science beyond AGW – issues that are important to the MSM and public communication of climate science.”

        Unlike the dedicated climate scientists who just present the facts and their best interpretation of the facts. Boring!

        No one has mentioned motive, but consider this: The oil companies have the most money; the oil companies have the most to lose if public opinion turns against the burning of fossil fuels; therefore it is probable that the oil companies are paying social media influencers top dollar to support the anti narrative. And it’s working, as shown by the 149% more visibility in the non-mainstream (i.e. less responsible and objective) media.

      2. AhNotepad

        Martin Black, I can’t help thinking your last paragraph looks a bit like conspiracy theory.

      3. Gary Ogden

        Jerome Savage: Yes, many are receding, some are advancing. With islands, some are shrinking, some are enlarging. What I am most skeptical of is the idea that human activities have more than a minor influence on Earth’s climate. During the Medieval Warm Period (during which Eric the Red and his clan colonized Greenland) the Earth’s climate was warmer than it is today. The ships of William the Conquerer landed further inland than today’s seacoast, because sea levels were higher then. This period was followed by the Little Ice Age, which was hell on earth, especially in Northern Europe. It drove my ancestor from Scotland to Rhode Island. One of the key factors to keep in mind about climate is natural variability, which is difficult to quantify, thus not a part of climate models. And there isn’t a damn thing we can do about it other than adapt. What governments are doing is causing a lot of people a lot of pain, as we all need energy, for little benefit.

      4. AhNotepad

        Gary, I post similar sentiments on what started off as an oil doomer forum, because I think they should be considered. When I do I get attacked as a Trumpist, a right wing shill, a troll, an oil company plant, anything else you can think of. I am told other forum members are tired of my ill researched, false, rubbish and many other terms. All this from someone who has a label of “Site Admin”. He has done similar things to other forum members when he disagrees with their views. I am wondering if my posts are a risk fator for CVD. His, not mine.

      5. David Bailey

        Martin,
        Whatever may be true of the media in general, the broadcast media seem to have been totally taken over by climate alarmism. The BBC cherry picks weather information looking for evidence of heating. Noisy signals throw up maxima from time to time, and that seems to be what the BBC specialises in. Apparently we have had the hottest Easter ever and one day in July was the hottest ever somewhere. Those two events were embedded in a generally cool, wet summer (at least here in the North).

        I would challenge the BBC to seek out record lows with the same effort it obviously puts into spotting maxima. That simple act would transform their reporting of climate.

      6. Gary Ogden

        Martin Back: You seem to have missed the point. The Nature Communications paper is an example of politics, or social science, if you wish. It is certainly not science. Like many other honorable scientists, Dr. Curry does actual science. What she writes is based upon evidence. If you had read as much actual climate science as I have, you, too, would be contemptuous of the media narrative. Two examples of nonsense purveyed by the media: 1. That the polar bear is endangered by a warming arctic. Not true. They are doing fine, and have survived multiple periods of glaciation and de-glaciation. 2. The Great Barrier Reef scare. Corals, too, are resilient, and have survived multiple periods of glaciation and de-glaciation. A large part of the problem is that prophecies of climate doom and gloom are based upon computer models. All of the models in use have run hot compared to data. I say, with climate science, like pharmaceutical medicine and everything else, the wise course is skepticism. With climate in particular, it is so vast and complex that it is poorly understood, and even temperature records prior to the satellite era, are suspect in their “adjusted” form.

      7. David Bailey

        Gary,

        There are two other fascinating pieces of evidence that seem to me to point to global warming being a non-issue, and I’d like to check them with you.

        1) Venus used to described as an example of extreme global warming because its surface temperature exceeds the melting point of lead, and its atmosphere is 90% CO2. In the 1990’s the US Magellan spacecraft tracked the temperature and pressure down to the surface. The surface is that hot, but the atmospheric pressure down there is 92 atmospheres! From the graphs (which are more difficult to obtain on the internet now) at the point in the atmosphere where the pressure is 1 atmosphere, the temperature is just 66 C. Bearing in mind that the planet is approximately half the distance from the sun as earth, and the huge concentration of CO2 in the atmosphere – the greenhouse gas effect would seem to be negligible or non-existent!

        2) I attended a side meeting about climate change at a UKIP conference a few years back. There the physicist speaker pointed out that greenhouses don’t work by stopping re-radiation of heat, they work by stopping the convection of heat away from the ground! This simple observation, which is obvious the moment it is pointed out, stunned me – the so-called greenhouse effect is at best only an analogy – akin to arteries blocking with globules of fat.

      8. Gary Ogden

        David Bailey: This would require a great deal of thought, but it really doesn’t sound reasonable that a tiny percentage of molecules of greenhouse gasses in the atmosphere could substantially alter the amount of convection or re-radiation to space of the heat absorbed by land and ocean surfaces. It seems ridiculous at first thought. One of the great unknowns are the effects of clouds, which are exceedingly difficult, perhaps impossible with any precision, to quantify. There certainly have been both warming and cooling events, dramatic at times, over millennial time periods in the historical record and for eons before this. This is called natural variability, and human populations have thrived to a greater degree in the warm periods than in the cold ones. The evidence is clear that Earth has been gradually warming since about the mid-19th Century. What’s not to like about that? The alarmists would have us think we’re doomed. I beg to differ. The only thing that would doom us are the war-mongers with nukes. Certainly not microbes, or the lack of vaccination, or the elites flying around all the time spewing greenhouse gasses into the stratosphere.

      9. Gary Ogden

        David Bailey: Some more thoughts: My greenhouse has a physical barrier, part glass and part plastic, which effectively impedes heat transfer through convection. The atmosphere has no such physical barrier, other than clouds, which I suspect impede convection currents to a lesser degree.

      10. Martin Back

        David,
        1) I’d like to quote two sentences from the Wikipedia article https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atmosphere_of_Venus

        “Despite the harsh conditions on the surface, the atmospheric pressure and temperature at about 50 km to 65 km above the surface of the planet is nearly the same as that of the Earth, making its upper atmosphere the most Earth-like area in the Solar System, even more so than the surface of Mars. … Venus has a high albedo, and reflects most of the sunlight that shines on it making the surface quite dark, the upper atmosphere at 60 km has an upward solar intensity of 90%, meaning that solar panels on both the top and the bottom of a craft could be used with nearly equal efficiency.”

        This agrees with what you say. So why isn’t it very hot at that level if the atmosphere is mostly CO2?

        The answer is that CO2 is transparent to sunlight. It reacts with the longer-wave infra-red radiation which is re-emitted by a solid body which has been warmed by the sun. (It is something to do with the vibrational energy of the C-O bond resonating with the long-wave radiation frequency, I believe.) And that long-wave radiation is 60 km down on Venus’s surface and struggling to get out out through a thick blanket of CO2. So at the level we are talking about, it is very bright but not warm. In fact, there is a howling wind at that level and atmospheric churn. I wouldn’t be surprised if most of the heat is brought up by atmospheric movement (unaffected by CO2) rather than by radiation (blocked by CO2).

        As an aside, if 90% of the sunlight is reflected by clouds, how did Venus’s surface get so hot? It must have a very efficient heat blanket keeping the heat in.

        2) Greenhouses work because they prevent stored heat from escaping. In greenhouses, it escapes via convection. On Earth,it escapes via radiation. Same principle, different mechanism.

        Maybe it should be called the Canadian window phenomenon. I read somewhere that in the colder parts of Canada they put sleeping bags over the windows to prevent heat radiating away into the night.

      11. Jerome Savage

        Gary I recall reading about carbon emissions & the potential for significant global warming some 35 or so years ago. There is currently an acceptance (as U know) of increasing carbon atmospheric content & it’s likely contribution to G.W. Not being an expert in anything really, I read and have read the reports since and it’s all pointing to the same outcome – cause & effect in effect!!. Its a bit like my acquired taste for ginger & garlic. If there is an article out there that suggests either if these are bad for the human body, I hav yet to read it. There are however a multitude in favour indicating significant health benefits. For that reason I imbibe daily. Similarly I hav believed the carbon/GW hypothesisfor for similar reasons . Ie lack of an alternative hypothesis – (until now i suppose) Either way we might be sceptical but it appears that something is afoot, Kilimanjaro very obvious snow loss, multiple glaciers receeding (by all accounts much in excess of those in growth – growing glaciers now make news), flooding in Miami/ Pacific islands arctic ice depletion & worldwide increased temperatures reported.. Now we can’t be sure this is a result of human activity but we certainly cannot rule it out, & like I said I saw this issue raised by scientists in the 1980’s. Am now looking out for a much weaker gulf stream & that too appears to be unfolding. Its likely we can do very little about it one or the other and anyway another big Krakatoa event could reduce temperatures going forward.
        During the early Christian days monks & hermits sought out the outer reaches of the then known world in order to contemplate & pray to Michael the archangel. (Dont ask me why) Mont Saint Michel is a famous example, Skellig Michael less so. The latter off the South West coast of ireland was abandoned some 500 yesrs after its founding due to a cooler less hospitable climate. Global cooling U might say. So it is possible that all this is not of man’s doing but we cannot rule it out & like I said, it follows predictions from decades ago.

      12. Gary Ogden

        Jerome Savage: Agreed. We cannot rule out the possibility that the rising levels greenhouse gasses have played a large role in the current warming. I remain skeptical, though, as the evidence is too equivocal.

  98. elizabethhart

    In a previous comment I noted the Murdoch media is currently aggressively lobbying for meningococcal B vaccination to be added to the taxpayer-funded schedule in Australia. However, the Murdoch media, aka News Corp, has a massive conflict of interest in that the Murdoch media/News Corp is associated with the Murdoch Children’s Research Institute, which has been involved with research on the GSK Bexsero meningococcal B vaccine product, research that has been funded by GlaxoSmithKline and Novartis. Also bear in mind that the Murdoch media ran an aggressive campaign over the past few years for coercive vaccination, i.e. their No Jab, No Play campaign, which was obligingly adopted by politicians here as policy, and enacted as the Federal No Jab, No Pay law, and some State No Jab, No Play laws, which makes vaccination compulsory to access financial benefits.

    Scott Morrison, the current Prime Minister, was Social Services Minister back in 2015 when the No Jab, No Pay bill was raised. According to a report in the Sydney Morning Herald, Scott Morrison had lunch with Rupert Murdoch around that time – did Mr Morrison receive instructions from Mr Murdoch in regards to the No Jab, No Pay bill, which was fast-tracked and enacted as the No Jab, No Pay law in January 2016?

    And now the Murdoch media is using the front page of its Sunday Telegraph newspaper to demand that Prime Minister Scott Morrison ‘FUND THE JAB’, demanding that the GSK Bexsero meningococcal B vaccine product for very rare invasive meningococcal disease be added to the taxpayer-funded schedule, where presumably it will be compulsory to access financial benefits and childcare. The Sunday Telegraph editorial “Fund vaccine for this killer” says “This is the last demand from our original campaign that has not been solved, and the Morrison government should know by now we are not going to give up until something is done to protect families”.

    Was this the goal of the Murdoch media all along, i.e. to get the GSK Bexsero meningococcal B vaccine product, which is associated with the Murdoch Children’s Research Institute, onto the taxpayer-funded schedule, and effectively mandated thanks to the No Jab, No Pay and No Play laws campaigned for by the Murdoch media? Was this part of a plan to develop a multi-billion dollar global market for the GSK Bexsero meningococcal B vaccine product?

    Is Prime Minister Scott Morrison going to bow to the demands of the Murdoch media, and over-turn the PBAC’s thrice rejection of the GSK Bexsero meningococcal B vaccine product, and add this very questionable product to the taxpayer-funded coercive vaccination schedule? Is this how taxpayer-funded vaccination policy is formulated in Australia, at the behest of the Murdoch empire?

    I’ve forwarded an email to the Chair of the Pharmaceutical Benefits Advisory Committee, challenging the Murdoch’s campaign for the GSK Bexsero meningococcal B vaccine product, it can be accessed via this link: https://elizabethhart.files.wordpress.com/2019/08/challenging-murdoch-influence-on-australias-coercive-vaccination-policy-eg-men-b-vax.pdf

    Reply
    1. elizabethhart

      Regarding the Murdoch media’s relentless campaign to get the thrice rejected GSK Bexsero meningococcal B vaccine product on Australia’s taxpayer-funded vaccination schedule…

      To give you an idea how Rupert Murdoch controls politics in Australia, see this article: ‘What did Rupert Murdoch and Kerry Stokes have to do with the Liberal leadership spill?’ https://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-09-18/liberal-leadership-spill-rupert-murdoch-kerry-stokes-influence/10262552?pfmredir=sm

      In regards to getting rid of Liberal leader Malcolm Turnbull, Rupert Murdoch is reported as saying: “We have got to get rid of Malcolm. If that’s the price of getting rid of him then I can put up with three years of Labor.”

      Another reported quote from Murdoch: “They’ll only be in for three years – it won’t be so bad. I did alright under Labor and the Painters and Dockers; I can make money under Shorten and the CFMEU.”

      In the end Rupert Murdoch ditched Labor and got behind Scott Morrison and the Liberals, see this article: ‘Unrelentingly partisan’: Did the Murdoch press sway the election?: https://www.smh.com.au/federal-election-2019/unrelentingly-partisan-did-the-murdoch-press-sway-the-election-20190522-p51q0s.html

      Former Labor Prime Minister Kevin Rudd said: “Murdoch, with 70 percent control of Australia’s print media, ran the single most biased campaign in Australian political history. Reason for the silence? People are in fear of Murdoch’s power.”

      And: “In addition to its newspapers’ front pages and columnists, which were almost uniformly glowing in their praise of Prime Minister Scott Morrison, and in attacking the ALP’s policies and leadership, every Murdoch paper editorialised in favour of the Coaltion on election eve.”

      So, the Murdoch press got behind Scott Morrison, who is now Prime Minister. And the Murdoch media is demanding that Scott Morrison ‘fund the jab’, i.e. the GSK Bexsero meningococcal B vaccine product associated with the Murdoch Children’s Research Institute. We await to see if Scott Morrison will deny the all-powerful Rupert Murdoch…

      Reply
  99. Aileen

    I work in an English NHS hospital. I was recently told that while flu vaccines for staff are not yet compulsory (though if we decline them we are supposed to fill in a tick-box form saying why), they soon will be. Apparently this will be achieved by writing the flu vaccine as a requirement into the terms and conditions of employment. So I imagine current staff will be all right for a while, unless they are seeking promotion or wish to change jobs. I didn’t react quickly enough to ask if this would apply to our NHS Trust or to the whole of the NHS (or whether it would apply to front-line staff or all staff).

    Reply
    1. chris c

      Scary but not unexpected. Next will be compulsory statins, then compulsory veganism.

      Om which subject have you seen Jeremy Corbyn recently? Since switching from vagetarianism to veganism he looks like a dead man walking, with a textbook case of Vegan Neck. Will there be a vaccine for that?

      Reply
      1. anglosvizzera

        I thought Jeremy C looked a bit haggard these days – what’s ‘Vegan Neck’? I will Google it of course…

      2. Sasha

        Maybe compulsory in a sense that if you don’t take them, your health insurance premiums go up, at least in the countries like the US. Similar to increased insurance for drunk drivers and those with lots of accidents.

  100. Anna M

    As to the Spanish flu, I’m currently reading a biographical work about the Lady Almina who was the inspiration for the Downnton Abbey series. Since her hospital work played such a huge part of her life, I am reading extensively about what the soldiers went through in WWI. I am totally aghast. Unbelievable horror and carnage. How the young men kept signing up I cannot fathom. And it wasn’t like you did your two years and went home. Some guys got injured, recuperated, got injured again, recuperated again and ultimately died. They must have so dreaded going back. Trenches, mud, tanks, chlorine and mustard gas, death, pain, wounded, poor rations and disease. No wonder they had shell shock. No wonder heart disease began to rise. What in hell was it for? I’ve never made sense of it.

    Reply
  101. anglosvizzera

    In the news – Nicola Sturgeon opens a new Glaxo-Smith-Klyne facility at Montrose – with all the new vaccines in the pipeline, they’re going to need plenty of aluminium salts to put in them…

    “The facility, which includes a microbiology laboratory, will manufacture sterile aluminium salts – compounds that boost the human body’s response to vaccines.”

    https://www.scotsman.com/news-2-15012/gsk-montrose-plant-opens-44m-vaccines-facility-1-4532807

    Reply
    1. AhNotepad

      anglosvizzera, I think “boost” as used by the pharmaceutical industry is a euphemism. I would use “hyper-stimulate” or “over stimulate”

      Reply
  102. Göran Sjöberg

    David,

    This is a little OT but I see the same thing here in Sweden as you do in the UK

    “Whatever may be true of the media in general, the broadcast media seem to have been totally taken over by climate alarmism.”

    To me there is a hidden agenda here.

    That a Nobel Laureate in physics, Ivar Giaever, decided to leave the American Physics Association because they support the MSM “nonsense” and left science behind tells me something about the sad sate of affairs on the climate issue.

    Reply
    1. David Bailey

      Thanks for that link – which I have often posted myself. I’d just like to correct one detail. You wrote,
      “Ivar Giaever, decided to leave the American Physics Association because they support the MSM “nonsense” ”

      Actually he left because the APS was effectively signing up all its members as supporters of the global warming nonsense – even though some clearly disagreed.

      https://www.climatedepot.com/2011/09/14/exclusive-nobel-prizewinning-physicist-who-endorsed-obama-dissents-resigns-from-american-physical-society-over-groups-promotion-of-manmade-global-warming/

      His letter is part way down that page, which also contains a lot of additional information about this subject.

      Reply
    2. Martin Back

      “I am not really terribly interested in global warming. Like most physicists I don’t think much about it. But in 2008 I was in a panel here about global warming and I had to learn something about it. And I spent a day or so – half a day maybe on Google, and I was horrified by what I learned… Is climate change pseudoscience? If I’m going to answer the question, the answer is: absolutely.”
      — 1 Nobel laureate (Giaever)

      “anthropogenic emissions of greenhouse gases are the likely cause of the current global warming of the Earth. Predictions from the range of climate models indicate that this warming will very likely increase the Earth’s temperature over the coming century by more than 2°C above its pre-industrial level unless dramatic reductions are made in anthropogenic emissions of greenhouse gases over the coming decades.

      Based on the IPCC assessment, the world must make rapid progress towards lowering current and future greenhouse gas emissions to minimize the substantial risks of climate change.”
      — 36 Nobel laureates https://qz.com/444787/a-group-of-nobel-laureates-have-signed-a-declaration-calling-for-urgent-action-on-climate-change/

      Reply
      1. andy

        Martin Back: Part of Mainau Declaration
        “Although there remains uncertainty as to the precise extent of climate change, the conclusions of the scientific community contained in the latest IPCC report are alarming, especially in the context of the identified risks of maintaining human prosperity in the face of greater than a 2 °C rise in average global temperature.”

        Scientists who spread alarm and fear have an agenda, be it climate change or vaccination.

    3. Martin Back

      Why should one Nobel laureate be taken seriously when 36 others who say the opposite are dismissed? I think it’s because on this blog, commenters celebrate the lone maverick who stands up for the truth against the powers of the Establishment.

      But before you cite Galileo and Semmelweis at me, lone mavericks who turned out to be right, consider that they were experts in their fields. But Giaever is self-confessedly no expert. He’s not interested in global warming, he doesn’t think much about it, all he knows is what he googled. Hardly the track record of someone who will overturn the established view of things.

      To give Giaever his due, he resigned from the American Physical Society (APS) because they claimed the evidence of global warming was incontrovertible. As Giever points out, no scientific theory is incontrovertible. Today’s theory can be overthrown in an instant if a more persuasive theory comes along.

      Note I use the term “persuasive theory”, not the term “better theory”, because there are instances where the ruling theory is overthrown by a worse theory. We are all familiar with the work of Ancel Keys, who set back the cause of nutrition by decades. Keys, incidentally, was also at one stage one of those lone mavericks standing against the establishment. And an expert. Those types are not always right.

      Getting back to Giaever, my take on what he says is not that he believes AGW is buncombe, but that he maintains there is too much uncertainty in the global measurement of temperature, and too many possible causes of any change in temperature, and too many unpredictable consequences of any change in temperature, to justify the spending of billions in an attempt to stabilise temperature. Without more knowledge, it might turn out to be fruitless expenditure, so let’s continue on our merry and extravagant way until more certainty emerges.

      That’s not science, that’s one man’s opinion. And we all have to make our own minds up as to the dangers or otherwise of AGW and adjust our behavior accordingly.

      Reply
      1. David Bailey

        Martin,

        “Why should one Nobel laureate be taken seriously when 36 others who say the opposite are dismissed? I think it’s because on this blog, commenters celebrate the lone maverick who stands up for the truth against the powers of the Establishment.”

        Because Giaever actually stood up, researched the issue, and explained his views!

        I think there are huge parallels with the scandals in medical research right now. Who can doubt that if some influential body asked medical researchers to say if they favoured the use of statins and believed in the cholesterol hypothesis, there would bet a high percentage saying yes to both questions – would it mean anything – no!

        In normal science perhaps both sides would be invited on to a panel to discuss their views. But this is something you never see in perverted science – instead one side uses ad Hominems against the other. Show me a video about cholesterol, statins, vaccines, or global warming where both side debate the subject.

      2. Sasha

        I agree. I haven’t read much on the climate science but I think there are plenty of scientists who say we should be changing our ways.

    4. Göran Sjöberg

      Well, I think you have to use your own judgement when you listen to what anyone says and to me what Ivar Giaever says about “climate change” makes very much sens though I have only been a professor of aerospace materials for some years which perhaps does not merit me make a judgment on this issue although I am surrounded every single day, as soon as I turn on the radio, by judgements on this issue from people from all various professions, not least from the clergy.

      Anyway what Giaever says makes much more sense to me than what our own Swedish 16 year old Greta has to tell me about the climate although she is by MSM (and the church) hailed as a new “messiah” when it comes to the future of our planet. To me as to Ivar Giaever, I guess, what she proclaims is more or less nonsense.

      Reply
      1. John Stone

        One thing that often bothers me, although I am agnostic on global warming, is that I still very much believe in the conservation of the planet – whereas some “climate change deniers” use this as an excuse for having a gung-ho attitude.

      2. AhNotepad

        Yes, G.T. Went by sailing boat for zero carbon. Forgot to say the crew was flying back to Sweden.

        Current score:

        Deceivers 6 Truth 0

        There are no plans for a rematch yet.

      3. Gary Ogden

        Meanwhile, in news from Canada, Tim Ball has prevailed in Michael Mann’s defamation suit against him. Both are climate scientists, and Mann (of the Hockey Stick) is one of the chief academic spokespeople for the alarmist narrative. Details at WUWT.

      4. Dr. John H

        John,
        I have found it very difficult to be an avid environmentalist, while at the same time knowing that the climate change narrative is a fraud.

  103. Chris Morriss

    I’ve just seen the BBC web-site article on the return of childhood measles to the UK.
    I’m sure that injecting vaccines into babies of less than one year old cannot, by any stretch of the imagination, be a good idea.

    Reply
  104. Clathrate

    Talking of the BBC, listening to Radio 2 during lunchtime yesterday (Monday 19th August), Jeremy Vine was discussing vaccines. Short summary – one side only presented to the story, bias of host apparent, anti-vaxxers should be ‘burnt at the stake’ (my exaggeration but in days gone by that would have been the solution as implied by the phone-ins – either that or fed to the lions), plus plenty of opinion to ban non-vaxxed children from attending school. The Joe Public that accepts authoritative voices at face value would have been hard pressed to have formed an opinion other than vaccines are life savers and those who don’t vaccinate (MMR in particular & 2 shots) are putting others (& in particular little un’s) in harm’s way.

    Reply
  105. James DownUnder

    It’s not, but because the mothers were themselves ‘jabbed’ the mothers have no natural immunity (from “normal” acquired measles) to pass onto their babies, – who are now at risk.

    Reply
  106. Anna M

    Martin Back,

    That the oil companies have all the money is an old canard. Repeated endlessly lo these many years. In fact, the deep pockets are the governments of the countries funding the IPCC and also the funders of research at universities. This money dwarfs what oil companies may spend on it. And, the research money only goes to those who toe the line. Only one possible answer – is that true science?

    Reply
    1. Jerome Savage

      Top 2 oil companies in the US alone have market value of over 400 billion (some sources say $540 billion)
      Top 14 oil companies in the world have market value over $3trillion.

      Reply
  107. JdL

    Thanks, Dr. Kendrick, for having the courage to take on this subject. Like you, I’m baffled at how normally even-tempered people can fly into a frenzy at any questioning of the vaccine dogma.

    If I had a baby today, I would carefully pick and choose what vaccines to give him/her and with what timing. Pouring dozens of substances into a young child with little thought seems clearly to be a bad choice.

    Reply
  108. Rtp

    Great article Dr Kendrick.

    Just so you know though, the smallpox and polio (and all the other) vaccines never worked. Not even a little.

    When a vaccine is introduced most doctors will simply alter their diagnosis whenever they see the same condition in a vaccinated patient. So they will go their list of similar looking conditions (or in some cases literally make up a new one) and diagnose something else instead.

    So measles is diagnosed as roseola or hand foot and mouth (amongst others).

    Smallpox is diagnosed as monkeypox, severe chickenpox, pellagra etc.

    Polio is Guillain Barre, MS, etc.

    Diphtheria is pharyngitis and so on.

    Remember too that 99.9999+% of all diagnoses in history have been made without a lab test. Indeed, requiring lab tests today (when we rarely asked for them before the vaccine) actually exacerbates the bias in the data.

    If you want to check my claims you can look up proxy data. For example *total* rates of liver cancer following the Hep B vaccine (ie not blamed on Hep B but overall); total rates of paralysis following polio vaccine; total rates of respiratory disease following diptheria/pertussis/flu shots; total rates of invasive disease following the various meningitis vaccines; total rates of congenital defects following the rubella vaccine. And so on.

    Yes I know my claim is huge, but it’s still true. There is no benefit to any vaccine and there never was. We have been conned by a massive (and pretty obvious if you think about it) self-fulfilling prophecy. That’s why you occasionally get stories with dozens of fully vaccinated kids coming down with measles or whooping cough at the same time. Statistically, if the vaccine was 90 or so per cent effective, then such stories would be impossible – one in a billion trillion basically. The vaccine hasn’t magically failed all of these dozens of students – it has failed every student – it is just that in such cases, doctors (for whatever reason – it could be because those particular doctors have lost faith in the vaccine) have actually diagnosed the condition even though the kids were vaccinated.

    Reply
    1. anglosvizzera

      Rtp – whilst I agree to some extent with your claim that diseases are now being diagnosed as ‘something else’ once a vaccine is available, I don’t agree with, for example, ‘measles’ manifesting as ‘roseola’ or ‘hand, foot and mouth disease’.

      This is because I had measles as a child and should therefore have had lifelong immunity, but when my children got hand, foot and mouth disease when I was in my mid-30s, I also developed it. My children also had ‘roseola infantum’ when they were young, but one of them as an adult tried to get out of having the MMR for work and had an antibody test for measles, which was negative – so she had never been exposed to the real measles virus and ended up having to have the MMR.

      I’m sure that many of the diseases have become so mild over time that they no longer have the obvious symptoms of the disease as it was years ago (eg pertussis seems to occur without the typical ‘whoop’ and so is often not diagnosed and mumps is often asymptomatic or appears as a mild ‘flu’ without the characteristic parotitis), but I don’t think it applies to all of them as you suggest.

      Reply
      1. Rtp

        Hand foot and mouth was first diagnosed in 1958. The measles vaccine came out just a few years later. All of a sudden lots of people started getting hand foot and mouth whereas it was exactly zero cases just before the vaccine.

        Amazing coincidence don’t you think?

        Look at when the Hep B vaccine came out and then look up when Hep C was first “discovered”.

        Another amazing coincidence.

        Now as for your question: “if measles and roseola were the same, why didn’t I acquire immunity to both?” Well the answer is not what you want to hear but here it is all the same:

        There is no such thing as immunity (to disease).

        Natural immunity is, like vaccine efficacy, a self-fulfilling prophecy. Doctors typically won’t diagnose measles twice in a person just like they won’t diagnose measles in a vaccinated person. Some will. Most will not. That is the only reason we believe in immunity (be it natural or vaccine derived)

        People can and do get (epidermis) rashes dozens of times in their lifetimes.

        Now the next part you really won’t want to hear (although it should ameliorate your concerns about lack of immunity) but I’ll say it all the same.

        Think especially about what we call hand foot and mouth disease. Think of the way the rash is presented. Now ask yourself how and why a virus (that just goes wherever the bloodstream is pumped to) could possibly cause a rash to present in such a way? How would any virus cause rashes to present themselves in a manner that was focused – let alone in corresponding parts of the body!*

        The answer is that epidermis rashes have *nothing* to do with a virus. They are about touch (or lack thereof). They do not spread (although the trauma that causes them can be shared by multiple people (or just one)). Siblings can suffer a trauma of a loss of touch (eg their mother going back to work). Their rashes will present on their body where their sub-concious mind most closely associates this loss of touch. A baby could miss suckling and putting their hands on the breast – hence a rash on hands and mouth. A toddler might miss hugging their mom – a rash behind their knees and inside the elbows.

        *NB that I have used hand foot and mouth disease because its presentation is the most obvious to get the point across but practically all rashes are focused as opposed to evenly spread around the body.

      2. anglosvizzera

        Rtp, but Hand, Foot and Mouth disease is one of the Coxsackie viruses whereas Measles is a Paramyxovirus…

        As for your myth of ‘immunity’, having had measles once in my life at age 6, I’ve never had anything remotely like it now I’m 62. In any case, my mother didn’t report my measles case to the GP, and I imagine neither did my friends’ parents as it was a ‘normal’ illness that practically everyone had back then. So if someone did get similar symptoms later on, their doctor would probably not have known that they had had measles as they would’ve been quite young and would have no reason to misdiagnose.

        When I had hand, foot and mouth disease and my children had it, I had never heard of it before! It wasn’t something that we had as children. It seems to have originated in Canada and New Zealand but obviously without things like the internet, it wasn’t known over here in the UK. I don’t recall any of my contemporaries or siblings ever having symptoms like that. So the fact that it affects ‘hands, feet and mouths’ doesn’t make sense according to your theory. Other ‘new’ diseases were ‘Slap Cheek/Fifth Disease’ (that none of us ‘got’) and Molluscum Contagiosum which we did get – funnily enough after my children shared a bath with their cousin. We didn’t know at the time that he had these strange warty-things and we later found out the name of it once my children got them.

        Yes, I understand that rashes can appear in many odd places but they can be triggered by things like vaccines, as in the case of my son who developed serious eczema all over his head and on the elbow and knee creases at the age of 8 weeks. That certainly wasn’t virus-related and appeared a day or so after his first vaccines (DPT/Polio) at 8 weeks of age. He was breastfed and certainly had lots of hugs! He did develop abscesses at the injection sites which turned into ‘lumps’ – I now know they are granulomas that contain aluminium from the vaccines he had, the body’s way of trying to stop that particular toxin from spreading around the body.

        Psoriasis and eczema do appear to have a huge emotional connection – I studied as a homeopath for 4 years and learned all about that aetiology, so I certainly don’t assume that all skin afflictions, rashes etc are ‘viral’!!

        Viral rashes are said to be the virus being eliminated from the body, being as the skin is an organ of excretion – and the atypical measles that occurred after the inactivated measles vaccine back in the 60s never had that rash, so the problem remained in the body, suppressed.

        I don’t know the complete answer of course, I’m just using logic to try and work out what you’re trying to say and then why some of it doesn’t make sense to me!

      3. Gary Ogden

        anglosvizzera: I recall “Dissolving Illusions” discussing hand, foot, and mouth disease in regard to certain smallpox vaccines. By the way, the paper you posted is the one I referred to. Much of profound importance there, such as how certainty has led us astray (in many fields besides Medicine).

      4. Gary Ogden

        anglosvizzera: Dr. Wakefield has just published a paper in the Journal of American Physicians and Surgeons which addresses many of these issues. Well worth a read. Posted today on Age of Autism.

      5. anglosvizzera

        Gary, do you mean this article? https://www.jpands.org/vol24no3/wakefield.pdf

        He’s not really discussing the same thing as my comment though. He’s talking about the difference between supposed vaccine-induced immunity and naturally-acquired immunity, and quite rightly saying that ensuring one has a good, strong immune system is a better way to protect against disease than vaccines.

        As far as I can see, he isn’t talking about other viral diseases with a quite different symptom picture manifesting as measles etc as Rtp is saying.

      6. Rtp

        Anglo first you said that you had been affected by rashes several times in your life and now you say you haven’t.

        Which is it?

        And your story about doctors assuming you didn’t have measles because they never asked you gets it backwards. They would have assumed you did have it (and were immune to it) – hence why they never asked.

        HFM was always diagnosed as measles before the vaccine – as were most cases of what we call roseola or 5th disease. It didn’t spring from anywhere. No disease does because they all stem from the mind. Not immigrants. Not unvaxed kids. Not promiscuous people. Just the minds of each individual.

        And why did you make that point about the different kind of viruses? All of that is a fabrication. Nobody has ever shown any of these diseases were caused by any kind of virus. That’s all made up.

        And even if it wasn’t do you seriously think that every (or even most) cases of HFM or measles or roseola or whatever in history were lab tested using PCR?

        They were not.

        And why would viruses expel themselves through the semi-porous skin as opposed to completely porous nose or mouth? And why do it in a manner that focuses these rashes in particular areas? How does your explanation make sense of a kid having a rash behind the knees and inside elbows? My explanation does.

        Epidermis rashes – all of them – are caused by trauma of touch (or lack thereof). And just because a child gets lots of hugs doesn’t mean they can’t be traumatized by an unexpected absence of them. To the contrary, they would often be the kids to suffer such a shock.

      7. anglosvizzera

        Rtp, I had a measles rash once, and blisters from H, F and M once – although I don’t call that a ‘rash’ in the medical sense. So not ‘several rashes’ in my life. Just one.

        If you read my comment more carefully, I didn’t say that doctors were referring to my case of measles, I was saying that hypothetically doctors wouldn’t necessarily know that someone had had measles and so wouldn’t have any reason to not diagnose it (even if it wasn’t actually measles.)

        I didn’t visit the doctor when I had H, F and M disease – why would I? It’s a mild, self-limiting illness that passes quickly.

        I am aware of the idea that viruses are ‘made up’. But if what we call a viral disease comes around in cycles, is often ‘apparently’ very contagious so that many people seem to get it at the same time, how does that fit in with the ‘mind’ producing the symptoms? Why would loads of children between 5 and 7 suddenly produce the typical symptoms of measles (which of course doesn’t start with a rash, but does have other symptoms before that) all at the same time every couple of years?

        I never knowingly ‘had’ chicken pox and didn’t even think about that fact – until I was 19. I went to a college interview and was feeling a bit ‘under the weather’ (like flu) and got home and noticed an itchy blister on my neck. I didn’t think any more of it until the following day when I broke out in loads of these blisters and my mother realised it was chicken pox. I then found out that my niece and nephew, who I’d seen a few days earlier when they visited (which didn’t happen more than once every couple of months) had ‘got’ chicken pox. So the contagiousness of this seemed to have been apparent as they were without symptoms when I saw them, so it wasn’t my ‘mind’ producing my symptoms a week or so later.

        I don’t think that your explanation makes any more sense than my own. The skin in the antecubital and popliteal fossae is very thin and sensitive, so maybe that’s why eczema, for example, often appears there.

        As for lab-testing, of course most diagnoses were done from signs and symptoms, but these days, it would appear that they can now distinguish between vaccine-strain measles antibodies and wild strains of measles antibodies. So there must be a huge cover-up going on if it’s all ‘made up’ (antibodies being a sign of exposure to a particular virus.)

        In homeopathy we consider that healing takes place from ‘inside’ to outside, from more important organs to less important organs – so the skin is the last ‘less important’ organ for elimination of toxins in that respect. It is often noticed that suppressing eczema with steroid creams etc on the skin leads to asthma, as that is the ‘skin’ too, the interface between the outside of the body and the air around us (or, in that case, air taken inside us.) Homeopathy also considers ‘miasms’, inheritances from our ancestors that make us more or less susceptible to producing symptoms of different kinds – so some families have a tendency to skin afflictions, whereas others may have an overproduction of mucous or grow ‘tumours’ (warts, polyps etc). It is thought that the scabies mite that often afflicted people in the distant past creating very itchy skin may be the thing that has caused this particular ‘skin sensitivity’ miasm in current generations.

        Anyway, I have no further desire to continue this ‘discussion’ as clearly we have different opinions. Whilst I know that the answers to it all are not always clear, and that things have been ‘made up’ and/or defy logic, I am open to sensible and reasoned explanations that are more than mere conjecture.

    2. Rtp

      “Rtp, I had a measles rash once, and blisters from H, F and M once – although I don’t call that a ‘rash’ in the medical sense. So not ‘several rashes’ in my life. Just one. ”

      But you originally did consider it a “rash” to make your point. And it is a rash. There are many rashes people get where some of their spots will blister and some will not – so there is no way to use blistering vs non-blistering to sensibly differentially diagnose the rashes. They are either epidermis rashes or dermis – blistering or not. If they are the former they are caused by a touch/loss of touch trauma.

      “If you read my comment more carefully, I didn’t say that doctors were referring to my case of measles”

      And if you had read my comment more carefully you would see it doesn’t matter (and why did you make it in the first place then if it wasn’t referring to your own case). Many doctors will *assume* an older patient has already had measles and therefore, in their mind, must have immunity and they will therefore change their diagnosis accordingly.

      “I didn’t visit the doctor when I had H, F and M disease – why would I? It’s a mild, self-limiting illness that passes quickly.”

      No idea what the point of that is.

      “I am aware of the idea that viruses are ‘made up’. But if what we call a viral disease comes around in cycles, is often ‘apparently’ very contagious so that many people seem to get it at the same time, how does that fit in with the ‘mind’ producing the symptoms?”

      People share the same trauma – eg siblings missing their mother, classmates missing their teacher and so on. Hence the appearance of contagion. There is no other possible explanation because in case you haven’t noticed, doctors spend their whole lives surrounded by sick people. If any disease was contagious then visiting – let along becoming – a doctor would be instantly fatal. Doctors typically won’t share the same traumas as their patients (but they do share their germs) so they are able to survive being around sick people just fine.

      Family reunions will often lead to these rashes (because the rash appears in the healing phase.)

      “Why would loads of children between 5 and 7 suddenly produce the typical symptoms of measles (which of course doesn’t start with a rash, but does have other symptoms before that) all at the same time every couple of years?”

      There are none of these cycles you speak of. Just random fluctuations in data. Data that is nothing more than a meaningless self-fulfilling prophecy.

      “I don’t think that your explanation makes any more sense than my own.”

      Except that it does. Indeed, not only is it the only explanation that makes *any* sense. It actually makes perfect sense. Of course rashes are about touch – it goes without saying when you realize that rashes are typically focused. The fact that people have not been able to see this for thousands of years speaks to how blind we have been.

      “As for lab-testing, of course most diagnoses were done from signs and symptoms, but these days, it would appear that they can now distinguish between vaccine-strain measles antibodies and wild strains of measles antibodies. So there must be a huge cover-up going on if it’s all ‘made up’ (antibodies being a sign of exposure to a particular virus.)”

      Wow! So you just used the exact same (fallacious) argument that pro-vaxers use against us when it comes to vaccine safety. At any rate your point is meaningless. Doctors have no idea what they are doing – they just “know” what the final result is supposed to show. They can’t distinguish between anything. They just know who has received a vaccine and who hasn’t – and they work from there. No scientist has ever shown how the particular virus causes the particular disease – they just make it all up. How does a measles or hand foot and mouth “virus” pool in certain corresponding areas of the body and nowhere else? It doesn’t. It cannot. It is all lunacy.

      And you don’t have to continue anything. My points stand regardless. It truly is amazing that you actually fully understand that doctors ddx using vax status but for some reason refuse to accept that they might have done so for measles!

      Reply
  109. AhNotepad

    https://www.theguardian.com/society/2019/sep/08/stop-measles-mmr-jab-compulsory-gps

    So this is “informed consent” in the UK. Where do these four GPs get their extensive knowledge of the safety and effectiveness of vaccines? Do they understand TH1 and TH2 immunity? They say there is a measles outbreak, have they the data to demonstrate that the “outbreak” is caused by the wild measles virus, and that is is not the vaccine virus? It is important that the GPs should respond on this blog, as it is about the only place I know of that is not frequented by those who push the profit before patient agenda. I would welcome a factual response explaining the precise mechanism by which vaccines provide protection.

    Additionally, if it is measles that is causing the problem, why is an MMR vaccine mandated?

    Boris is exceeding his knowledge base in suggesting/asking GPs to ensure children in their care get their “catch up” vaccinations. This is coersion, not informed consent, or have I got it wrong?

    Reply
    1. AhNotepad

      Harris must be a psychopath like Richard Pan. Anyone who thinks a mandatory medical procedure is acceptable, is condoning criminal assault. If they think the procedure is effective, they are ignorant as well. Well I suppose it’s effective in boosting pharmas profits. These politicians must be sacked. Protests just indicate they are able to mandate such things.

      Reply
      1. Jerome Savage

        Yes. Reading up on Gary Goldman very recently and how his research was given cold shoulder treatment, does not inspire confidence.
        Although on a separate note, I was pleased to see the NYT is able to apply some level of critical analysis to big Corpo abuse of power.

      2. briansteere

        This is a long range strategy – note:
        – – –
        The explicit underlying assumptions on which MIT’s computer model operated were formulated to create a scenario that would result in a general reduction of living standards of the overall world population, but not, of course, its ruling elites. The study’s director, Jay Forrester, openly declared this in his 1971 book, World Dynamics:
        “Rising pressures are necessary to hasten the day when population is stabilized. Pressures can be increased by reducing food production, reducing health services, and reducing industrialization”.
        – – –
        Note that the vectors are achieved by reducing nutritive contents, increasing toxic exposures, including as health care – reducing industrialisation is to be worked by both throttling money supply and the introduction of carbon guilt economy under the IoT.
        I took this quote from the latest mailing from William H Engdahl: ‘Hidden History of UN Global Warming Politics’ – extracted from his ‘Myths, Lies and Oil Wars’.

        Because the scenario of remaking the world by coercion and deceit is so unthinkable, our mind recoils – and yet everyone has the wish to make the world fit their ideas – but no more than momentary illusion of the power to do so. But are our collective wishes feeding the embodiment of power to ‘lord it over life’ – Rather than recognise and align the power within Life?

  110. Jerome Savage

    Emotive medicine
    “Laura had been diagnosed with end stage cervical cancer and passed away on March 20th this year at the age 26, but not before dedicating much of her time to highlighting the importance of the HPV vaccine in saving lives”
    Last night’s programme was by all accounts heart rending stuff. Any critical analysis of vaccines will not be tolerated by the Irish media or public figures.
    Laura Brennan documentary moves viewers to tears and prompts outpouring of gratitude with #ThankYouLaura
    https://www.independent.ie/entertainment/television/laura-brennan-documentary-moves-viewers-to-tears-and-prompts-outpouring-of-gratitude-with-thankyoulaura-38505792.html

    Reply
    1. Gary Ogden

      barovsky: Yes, medical fascism is now the law of the land in my home State. No doctor will be writing any medical exemptions any longer, such are the draconian penalties attached to this bill, except those who cater to the wealthy. What will parents be doing? Some will leave; some will make great sacrifices to homeschool. Not likely any will subject their children to further poisoning. This is brought to us by the political party which once was the champion of ordinary people, but now, like the other party, is fully bought by the drug cartel.

      Reply
    2. Jerome Savage

      Barovsky
      Need to be careful that the argument is not influenced by a non related but time connected tragedy. It is of course very possible that an adverse condition can develop shortly after a vaccine shot, that simply has nothing to do with the vaccine itself. The timing of the vaccine might just happen to co’-incide with an already developing condition. Its natural for a parent to associate a new condition to a recent jab. Its normal, a knee jerk reaction but very understandable as a parent desperately tries to make sense. The question that needs to be asked is, is there a pattern? Or are any adverse medical conditions that develop statistically insignificant with no correlation to an earlier jab ? do the medical conditions follow a normal pattern irrespective of any vaccinations ? Science & statistics should dictate the argument – less of the emotive. The same applies to those who showcase the emotive in favour of vaccines.
      Programme on BBC2 last night on vaccines was designed to support the established line. All the pro vaxxers were highly rational, qualified doctors or scientists while the anti vaxxers came across as somewhat unhinged and possibly difficult to identify with, for your average Mr & Mrs Jones. First shot of Del Bigtree gave the impression of a demented evangelical preacher asserting / shouting his belief in God on the public street, a mother with multiple body adaptations / artistic embellishments whose message was lost in this fascinating vision, Robert Kennedy who is very difficult to understand and then a suggestion that a semblance of paronoia exists among anti vaxxers who link pro vaxxers with Nazism. Andrew Wakefield was viewed from a distance, too dangerous & spooky to approach or interview. Maybe in 10 or 20 years time the embellishment of the pro vaccine line will seem unfair. Oh, there were multiple shots of mothers hysterically shouting & waving placards – anti V of course.
      There were statements by one pro vaccer that could most definitely be contested, e.g. very little money to be made from vaccines – many manufacturers had opted out of production after all. And there was no way that V manufacturers would deliberately go out to hurt children. Nobody made that allegation in the first instance. Interesting nonetheless.

      Reply
      1. John Stone

        Like all other mainstream media outlets the BBC are actively excluding senior critical scientists and doctors – of which there are actually a great number all the way up to Luc Montagnier – from commenting though many would be prepared to. Most news outlets just knuckle under – the editors just think it is more trouble than its worth and in the US it threatens directly there entire advertising revenue, but the BBC have a particularly creepy non-equivalence policy.

        https://www.ageofautism.com/2011/07/scientific-totalitarianism-at-the-bbc.html

        And there is a new generation of “journalists” who just live to be patted on the back by industry and government. Why do the BBC feature a French lady who runs a Facebook page rather than Luc Montagnier, Henri Joyeux or Marc Girard? They even managed to flash a picture of Marine Le Pen up, who has nothing whatever to do with it. Everything is subliminal, manipulative.

      2. AhNotepad

        John Stone, the BBC is merely a mouthpiece for corporate interests, with words provided via the intellectual pygmies that inhabit government cabinet positions.

        I have previously written to the BBC complaining about their coverage. They reply justifying their misinformation, then I send them published references demonstrating the error of their information. Then they suggest I write to the executive complaints department. Then they don’t respond.

        THE BBC IS NOT TO BE TRUSTED.

      3. Janet Love

        Not to read the newspapers (“media”) is to be un-informed, and to read (view) them is to be mis-informed, declared a wordsmith last Century.
        Human nature hasn’t changed a bit!

      4. Anna Kamstra

        I have also read both articles first that having measles van harm you and then the explanation why the anti-bodies disappear and how real immunity works. To set one’s mind straight about the measle virus it is very important to listen to the following explanation to understand how the virus interacts with us. Do not get a fright if you have to listen to Dr. Wakefield, he is not the demon he is made up to be! https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=1&v=k8blL8cuUgE

      5. AhNotepad

        If anyone wants to examine Andrew Wakefields story, they should read his book, “Callous Disregard”.

      6. AhNotepad

        Thank you John. Frightening stuff. For those (like me) who don’t read many of the linksposted here, This is an extract which may encourage further reading: (perhaps the 5g will be used to force people to comply with this, and any other mad political scheme).

        “And just in the last weeks, without publicity, the European Commission have published a document designed to lead to a vaccine ID being attached to the European passport by 2022 [8]. What is perhaps most alarming about this is that none of it has come into place with any democratic mandate at all: Obama’s manoeuvres were entirely executive, no one elected the European Commission and there has been no popular demand for such measures, in Italy one government was voted out having brought in mandates in the preceding months and another voted in committed to repealing them, and reneged on its promise. Where did it come from? Meanwhile, everywhere citizens who speak out are loaded with hatred and abuse by the mainstream media: journalists who were not there, do not know what happened, and do not know or apparently care about the complexity of the scientific literature.

        But now from behind the scenes a consortium has emerged: the ID2020 Alliance with founder members Accenture, GAVI, Microsoft, the Rockefeller Foundation and IDEO.org [9], formed in 2017 with the apparent object of tagging every global citizen by the year 2030 [10]. GAVI in turn is in partnership with every vaccine manufacturer, and plainly global vaccination is at the heart of this agenda: it was also in 2017 the director of GAVI, Seth Berkley, who called for “anti-vaxxers” to be excluded from social media – which meant in ad hominem terms anyone who was critical of the vaccine program in any respect. Berkley, it may be remembered was nominated by the Mail on Sunday as “the fattest charity fat cat of them all” while GAVI’s activities are heavily bank-rolled by the British government [12]. Whatever these people are doing it is well outside the scrutiny of the global public, and not all necessarily for their benefit.

        There must also be a shiver at the inclusion of the Rockefeller Foundation. As recorded in Wiki [13]:

        “Beginning in 1930 the Rockefeller Foundation provided financial support to the Kaiser Wilhelm Institute of Anthropology, Human Heredity, and Eugenics, which later inspired and conducted eugenics experiments in the Third Reich.

        “The Rockefeller Foundation funded Nazi racial studies even after it was clear that this research was being used to rationalize the demonizing of Jews and other groups. Up until 1939 the Rockefeller Foundation was funding research used to support Nazi racial science studies at the Kaiser Wilhelm Institute of Anthropology, Human Heredity, and Eugenics (KWIA.) Reports submitted to Rockefeller did not hide what these studies were being used to justify, but Rockefeller continued the funding and refrained from criticizing this research so closely derived from Nazi ideology. The Rockefeller Foundation did not alert “the world to the nature of German science and the racist folly” that German anthropology promulgated, and Rockefeller funded, for years after the passage of the 1935 Nuremberg racial laws.””

      7. AhNotepad

        John, thank you for the link. Luckily I read the article, then went on to look at some of the of the articles you have on “The Age of Autism” site. One point that stood out was that Offit chappie said that he did not mean his 10,000 and 100,000 vaccine related figures for babies to be taken literally. If he did not mean it, what exactly did he mean? Perhaps he would like to provide us with the official “Offit Dictionary” so we have some slight chance of understanding the meaning of the statements he makes.

      8. John Stone

        No, he evidently meant it and it was repeated by U.K. health officials ad nauseam. The idea I believe was to persuade people that 10 or 20 vaccines at a time (remember this January 2001 and many were still in the pipeline that we have now including his Rotateq) would be no big deal. I don’t know precisely what he says now but the Every Child By Two website of which he was an advisory board member started to take pot shots at me, saying he had never meant it like that.

    3. John Stone

      Thanks for posting. I am just making available what is in the official documents and can scarcely believe my own eyes.

      Reply
  111. mathtuition88

    Thank you. It is exceptionally suspicious that doctors or scientists who criticize vaccines are silenced, criticized or even fired from their jobs. We need more experts like you to speak up on the dangers of vaccines.

    Reply
    1. AhNotepad

      mathtuition88, not really so suspicious. The vaccine manufacturers want a profit, and vaccines provide huge incomes without liability, as long as they mention on the insert that it could cause all manner of adverse effects. The benefit to the manufacturers is the repeated hyper-stimulation of the immune system often results in chronic autoimmune conditions. What’s not to like? This gives the opportunity to supply more drugs, often for life, to deal with the condition(s).

      I’m in the money, I’m in the money……………….

      Reply
  112. Janet Love

    Don’t forget your mobile (cell-phone for our US friends) phone is probably spying on you, even if you think you’ve turned it off. – That little snippet from our Good Mate, Edward Snowden – and he would know !
    Google, the owner of ‘Android OS’ has been accused (by “non-mainstream” / different health sites…) as showing a bias against anything *not establishment & Big Medicine* health/medical.
    Then there is the unholy haste to roll out ‘5G’, with big safety questions being ducked, evaded and simply not answered.
    – You could be forgiven for thinking there’s a conspiracy to sicken and de-populate the planet !

    Reply
    1. barovsky

      FYI on 5G given as how 5G has NEVER been tested for the health effects of 5G (5G previously a US military weapon called Active Denial System, see: https://www.wakingtimes.com/2019/09/06/5g-and-mmwave-the-active-denial-system-ads-and-how-mmwave-can-be-weaponized/

      To Residents of the UK,

      BBC Radio 4’s Today programme has asked its listeners to email in topics that they want the BBC to cover during this general election campaign. I am sending this email to 14,553 UK residents who are signatories of the 5G Space Appeal. If all of you email the BBC asking them to cover the health and environmental effects of 5G, they will cover it.

      The BBC has requested that emails should be be sent to today@bbc.co.uk, with the subject line “Off the Grid.”

      Reply

Leave a Reply to JohnQPublic Cancel reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s