Why Wakefield and the MMR story is only partially true at best
Thanks to a number of ‘modern world’ factors, the gut microbiome of children is damaged like no generation before. Damaged from before birth, damaged during birth, damaged after birth. And by the time the MMR vaccine comes along, it is little more than the ‘coup de grace’ for these children.
Autism and the gut
A lot is now understood about autism.
Kids with autism often have severe gut problems – for example, they are twice as likely as children with other types of disorders to have frequent diarrhoea or colitis, an inflammation of the large intestine. GI problems are frequent anyway in children with autism; pain and constipation are more common.
A study(1) by Rosa Krajmalnik-Brown and Jin Gyoon of Arizona State’s Biodesign Unit researchers showed that kids with autism had a greatly reduced spectrum of gut bacteria. One in particular, Prevotella, was missing completely.
Research studies (and there are many) have clearly indicated that poor levels of gut bacteria can trigger inflammation which reaches the brain.
Many children nowadays have a damaged gut microbiome
So how does damage (typically a lowered volume and lowered diversity of commensal or ‘good’ bacteria) occur in the infant gut?
A healthy baby picks up bacteria largely in three ways
1. By passing through the birth canal
2. By being breast fed
3. By bacteria from mother’s illness: Surprisingly, the womb is not inert and bacteria have also been shown to be picked up from, for example, type-2 diabetic mothers.
So, it is likely that there is a matrix of factors causing lowered commensal bacteria and heightened pathogens – for example,
i. Babies born to mothers with abnormal vaginal bacteria (due to drugs, prescribed or otherwise, or even stress). One study showed that expectant mothers who had taken antibiotics in the year before conceiving had babies with less commensal bacteria.
ii. Babies born by Caesarian clearly have less ‘good’ guys.
iii. Children having antibiotics early in life have damage.
iv. Babies not breast fed.
v. Babies born to mothers who are ‘ill’.
So these factors and more can leave young children with less good guys and more pathogens, especially since the prime bacteria gained from a healthy mother who is breast feeding are strains of Bifidobacterium and these are very strong in their control of pathogens in the first 6 to 12 months of life.
Gut bacteria ‘control’ your immune system
Your gut bacteria control 85 per cent of your immune system and immune memory. This happens through an ‘action and reaction’ system. A child touches the dog and then sucks her fingers immediately introducing new bacteria into the body. There’s a reaction, and new ‘tailored’ white cells are made, providing protection for life, if the invaders stick around.
Gut bacteria control your mental state
And we also know that changes in the gut affect the brain. In Cell, Dec 19th, 2013, University of Colorado Boulder Professor Rob Knight commented on the first study from a group of American researchers in the newly formed Autism Microbiome Consortium, saying, “This study strengthens the scientific understanding that what goes on in your gut affects what goes on in your brain”.
They induced autism symptoms in mice, which were greatly reduced when the mice were fed the bacterium Bacteriodes fragilis. Researchers found that levels of 4-ethylphenylsulfate were 46 fold heightened in mice with autism-like symptoms but Bacteriodes fragilis reduced these levels to normal.
The clash between gut bacteria and vaccines
Your protective white cells largely form in response to invasive gut bacteria. The obvious question then is, ‘so what is the relationship with vaccines which are also basically designed to prompt an immune reaction?’
The skeptics point to the dangers of introducing foreign DNA and RNA contained in vaccines into your body, especially now we understand what it can do in the microbiome. We already know, for example, that certain Japanese island fishermen have taken DNA into their own DNA over the years from the sea kelp they have consumed.
We are also clear on the potential damage of carriers such as Thimerosal, (mercury), and other sometime ingredients like formaldehyde, aluminium, MSG, methanol, antibiotics and even nagalase. No one can possibly say these have no effect. Even the American Government does not claim vaccines are 100 per cent safe, as we told you in the Previous article ‘The Truth about Vaccines’.
Vaccinations have a greatly reduced effect with strong microbiomes
A big clue to the relationship between vaccines and the strength of the gut microbiome lies with vaccination in the African Continent. There, children can have very strong microbiomes and often vaccination is being shown to fail. The strong microbiome ‘deals’ with the intruder pathogen!
In a 2011 paper(2), researchers from Canada noted that clinical trials showed oral vaccines against polio, rotavirus and cholera had less efficacy and blunted immune response with individuals in developing nations. In these cases, they stated, the individuals have greater gut bacteria diversity than individuals in the developed world and those ‘defences’ don’t just deal with illnesses, they deal with the vaccine components too.
In 2013, studies(3,4) resulting from a collaborative effort between the University of Maryland School of Medicine Institute for Genome Sciences and the Center for Vaccine Development backed this up.
The first study examined the impact of an oral typhoid vaccination on the gut bacteria; the second looked at the impact of vaccines against Shigella, but this time in monkeys. And a third study looked into what happens when the gut bacteria are exposed to wild-type Shigella, which as with S. Typhi, gain access to the body orally (PLOS ONE).
The first conclusion was that the magnitude of the natural immune response depended on the existing diversity of gut bacteria. The more diverse the existing gut bacteria, the greater the resistance to infection by wild type Shigella. No surprises there really.
But the greater the diversity of gut bacteria, the more the characteristics and magnitude of the immune responses to the vaccines were too.
“Our research raises the intriguing possibility that the gut microbiota may play an important role in response to vaccines and susceptibility to enteric pathogens, or bacteria that affect the intestinal tract,” stated Claire M. Fraser, PhD, professor of the Departments of Medicine and Microbiology and Immunology and director of the Institute for Genome Sciences (IGS) at the University of Maryland School of Medicine.
The other study analysed what happened to the human gut microbiota when an oral typhoid vaccination using Salmonella Typhi (S. Typhi) was given. Sure enough, the gut bacteria were affected; and it seems that the more diverse the microbiome members, the stronger the immune responses against the vaccine.
So does MMR cause autism?
There is far, far more in my book, ‘Heal your gut, heal your body’, but it is clear that a weakened microbiome and a loss of commensal bacteria is the major factor in autism.
Sure, vaccines don’t help. To put this in context, a child in America, if the Government CDC recommendations are followed to the letter, will receive 49 doses of vaccines in 14 shots by the age of six. By the age of 18 this reaches 69 doses in 16 shots.
And this is the problem. It is a huge load on an already imperfect microbiome.
Clearly there are factors in MMR vaccines which are toxic to a child’s gut bacteria anyway. And the genetic material in MMR is classified as live/attenuated. So it’s not a truly ‘safe’ vaccine.
But if the gut microbiome of the child was perfect and 100 per cent strong would the MMR vaccination have any negative effect at all? I doubt it very much, as the studies from Africa suggest. I’d be far more worried about the over-use of antibiotics on the very young.
Ref 1: Rosa Krajmalnik-Brown, Jin Gyoon; PLOS ONE, July 3rd, 2013
Ref 2: Rosana B. R. Ferreira, L. Caetano M. Antunes, and B. Brett Finlay, Glenn F. Rall, Editor; PLoS Pathog. 2010 November; 6(11): e1001190. Published online 2010 November
Ref 3: Anna M. Seekatz, Aruna Panda, David A. Rasko, Franklin R. Toapanta, Emiley A. Eloe-Fadrosh, Abdul Q. Khan, Zhenqiu Liu, Steven T. Shipley, 2. Louis J. DeTolla, Marcelo B. Sztein, Claire M. Fraser. Differential Response of the Cynomolgus Macaque Gut Microbiota to Shigella Infection. (PLoS ONE, 2013; 8 (6): e64212 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0064212)
Ref 4: Emiley A. Eloe-Fadrosh, Monica A. McArthur, Anna M. Seekatz, Elliott F. Drabek, David A. Rasko, Marcelo B. Sztein, Claire M. Fraser. Impact of Oral Typhoid Vaccination on the Human Gut Microbiota and Correlations with S. Typhi-Specific Immunological Responses. (PLoS ONE, 2013; 8 (4): e62026 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0062026)
The Truth about Vaccines
Many people just take their shots before they go abroad; many Mums just take their kids for their shots because they protect the child from a host of dangerous diseases.
But do you really know what might be in the vaccine?
We are not going to enter a debate with vaxxers and anti-vaxxers – we just deal in facts. And the US Government produces lists of facts. Some people just choose to ignore them.
Vaccines are not 100% safe
The fact is that vaccines are not safe – they do come with risk, a risk that is unquantified. In the early days of UK Junk Science when we ran a report on HPV, we received a number of e mails from UK women whose daughters had been seriously damaged, yet UK Health Authorities were dismissive.
They might be in the UK, but in America the Centre for Disease Control (the CDC) already acknowledges that Vaccine Spectrum Disorder (VSD) exists
There is also an American Government compensation plan for children who suffer intestinal damage as a result of receiving Rotavirus vaccine.
But, apart from this being a very big business making huge profits for drugs companies, you should understand that doctors around the world are increasingly paid to vaccinate. So don’t expect informed objectivity on vaccines for your infant!
What’s in your vaccine?
Vaccines contain genetic material. Of course they do
Vaccines used on children aged 0-6 can contain genetic material that is:
a) Live/attenuated (for example, rotavirus, measles, mumps, rubella)
b) Inactivated/killed(for example, polio, hepatitis A)
c) Toxoid (inactivated toxin – for example, tetanus, diptheria)
d) Subunit/conjugate (for example, flu, Hepatitis B)
More on this can be found in the ‘History of Vaccines’ by the College of Physicians in Philadelphia(1).
Studies on the microbiome have now clearly shown that external nucleic material can be incorporated into the host’s DNA.
Vaccines can contain mRNA and DNA from eggs or the animals used to grow the vaccine. The animals nucleic message can become yours.
So when the original Polio vaccine (the Salk vaccine) was made using Simian Monkeys it brought with it Simian Monkey Virus or SV-40 and more than 1 million Americans were infected. Definitely.
Japanese researchers (Yamomoto(2), Nakatsuka(3)) have shown higher levels of SV-40 in people with cancer, over the norm in healthy people, although a review by Keerti Shah(4) sought to dismiss this. So it is linked with higher cancer rates. Possibly.
Vaccines also commonly contain:
• Antibiotics to prevent contamination – for example, neomycin
• Stabilisers to thicken and maintain the composition of the vaccine – Lactose, other sugars, sucrose, sorbitol, gelatin
• Inactivating material against viruses – for example, Formaldehyde
• Preservatives like Thimerosal (mercury)
• Adjuvants to stimulate a stronger immune response – like aluminum
Find out more about your vaccine in this official US Government Document:
There’s not a lot to argue about.
See the mini-documentary series Starting 12th April for FREE – The Truth about vaccines Go To: http://bit.ly/2o2uUsp
GMOs, terminator seeds, and a European cover-up?
‘Seeds of destruction’ by William Engdahl is a must-read book for anyone remotely interested in their health and especially that of their children, grandchildren and so on. It is available on Amazon.
Here is part 1 of our review on the book, in which we focus on GMOs and terminator seeds:
Engdahl starts with the famous 2012 ‘Caen Study’ by Professor Gilles-Eric Seralini (1), where more than 200 rats were divided into two equal groups, one a control, the other fed with GMO NK603 Maize. Pictures of the tumours in the GMO-fed rats shocked the world.
The original Monsanto research ‘proving’ safety showed that the measured period was just 90 days – in Seralini’s research tumours only started to appear after 4-7 months!! Where Roundup was used, the female rats died 2-3 times more quickly. While mammary and pituitary tumours were more prevalent in female rats, liver and kidney tumours were 2.5-3 times more likely in males and overall GMO-fed males had 4 times the levels of tumours of the control groups. Monsanto seeds are genetically modified to resist the weed-killing effects of Roundup. The seeds can accumulate Roundup (glyphosphate) throughout their life.
Monsanto has repeatedly refused requests to publish the exact formula and contents of Roundup claiming ‘Trade Secret’ status. Research however has shown that it can affect human embryo cells in doses far lower than used in agriculture (2).
In both the USA and Europe, scientific testing on GMO seeds had uniquely been left to the seed company. Animal research was never conducted beyond 90 days.
The European Regulatory body (the EFSA in Brussels) had passed the seeds in 2009 whilst conducting little research of its own and never for more than 90 days.
The EFSA response was to question the credibility of the Seralini study and dismiss it. More than half of the EFSA panel members had conflict of interest with the very companies they should have been protecting the EU population from, according to a study by the Corporate Europe Observatory. A Spanish Study (which was little more than an endorsement of GMO from the Spanish Government) was often cited as corroboration for the EFSA view. Worse, the EFSA commissioned no study to check out the Seralini findings.
In 2001 Monsanto, along with Coca Cola, Kraft, Nestle and ADM, another GMO company, helped form the ‘independent’ Washington-based ‘International Life Sciences Institute’, or ILSI. A scandal erupted when Professor Diana Banati who was on the EFSA board went to take up a simultaneous position on the European arm of ILSI. Public interest groups have noted this ‘revolving door’ effect in Brussels on many occasions.
Anne Glover, Chief Scientific Adviser to the EU, has gone on record as saying that there is no substantiated scientific evidence against GMOs.
All this with different European public polls showing almost 80% public rejection of GMO foods.
Monsanto is currently being fused with the giant European Bayer Corporation, also advocates of GMO.
In 2007, Monsanto took over a company called Delta and Pine Land. This company had been a long-term recipient of US Government funding. It had been developing Genetic Use Restriction Technology, or GURT. This is also called ‘Terminator Technology’. Seeds grow their plants for one season, and that’s it. Never again. So if you are a farmer, you have to come back and buy more the next year. This is the very antithesis of what seeds are all about!
The Terminator Technology was protected by a patent (No: 5,723,765), owned jointly by the company AND the US Government.
Clearly, it could be used to control farmers and their crops from Mexico to Iran. So, it also could control whole countries and their food production. But, at the same time, it endangers all living crops in all countries as the spread of the seeds is difficult to control.
It would not be the first time that America has sought to use food this way. Henry Kissinger called it ‘Food as a Weapon’, when regime change was brought about in Chile by American pressure. As Kissinger said in 1970, “Control Oil and you control continents; control food and you control the people”.
The USA has openly said it wants to encourage use of its seeds around the World. And by developing the World Trade Organisation, individual countries signing up, cannot impose a restriction on ‘Free Trade’ because they are concerned about ‘health risks’. That would constitute an ‘unfair trade barrier’ and bring the threat of trade sanctions. Second and third world countries are potentially in big trouble.
Monsanto and Syngenta have publically declared that they will not use Terminator Technology. The US Government has refused to drop its involvement in Terminator development.
1. Gilles-Eric Seralini et al, Genetically modified crops safety assessments: present limits and possible improvements, Environmental Sciences Europe 2011, 23:10, accessed in http://www.enveurope.com/content/23/1/10.
2. Aris, A., Leblanc, S., Maternal and fetal exposure to pesticides associated to genetically modified foods in Eastern Townships of Quebec, Canada, Reproductive Toxicology, 2011 May;31(4):528-33. Epub 2011 Feb 18.
Global Warming is an issue far from settled – Part 2
The Mail on Sunday (Feb 5th 2017) ran the headline ‘How world leaders were duped into investing billions over manipulated global warming data’. The paper claims that the ‘world’s leading source of climate data (America’s National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration(NOAA) rushed to publish a landmark paper that exaggerated global warming and was timed to influence the historic Paris agreement on climate change’. The NOAA report stated that there had been no pause in Global warming – as UN scientists claimed in 2013 – between 1998 and 2015 and that global temperatures had been rising faster than expected.
A ‘whistleblower, Dr. John Bates, a top NOAA scientist claims that the data was never subjected to the NOAA’s rigorous internal evaluation process which he himself had devised.
The ‘pause’ in global warming being refuted led this ‘landmark paper’ to be called the ‘Pausebuster’.
In our recent article about Global warming being a hoax, we argued these key points:
1. The many ‘expert scientists’ had changed the dialogue in the late 1990s from Global Warming to Climate change, as there had been a glitch in the global warming data starting around 1998.
2. There is little doubt that we have Climate Change, but it was ever thus. We live on a piece of molten rock which hurtles, spinning, through space. How much of ‘Climate change’ is man-made (fossil fuels, plastic bags etc.) and how much is ‘natural’ (earth quakes, volcanic eruptions, El Nino etc.)? A number of people wrote to us, adding the effect of sunspots which have apparently been pronounced in the past decade or so and even ‘Chem trails’ where high altitude spraying is trying to change/control weather patterns.
3. There is a resurgence in the recent claims for global warming, but a number of expert measurements, (we mentioned two from space), disagree. We also mentioned that a former economics professor from Sonoma, Jamal Munshi, who specializes in statistics and who gains no financial benefits from the personal work he does, was puzzled because on analysis of the first thousand temperature measuring points around the world, he had found NASA’s data to be consistently too high. Several writers attempted to discredit him personally but that is just nastiness.
4. We received 5 ‘complaints’ and 8 ‘agreements’. The complaints almost always used the ‘fact’ that 97% of the World’s experts agreed on global warming and that fossil fuels were totally the cause. When asked, Professor Munshi himself provided the data FOR the fossil fuel cause; See: http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v459/n7248/abs/nature08047.html
and why it was WRONG; See:
Others pointed out to us, the existence of the UN paper. Published by UN expert climate change scientists, it claimed that the growth in global warming had slowed greatly after 1998, yet CO2 levels had continued their upward trend, thus questioning the supposed link.
We note that the Mail on Sunday claims that:
1. NOAA’s 2015 ‘Pausebuster’ paper was based on two new sets of data – one measuring land temperatures and the other, sea temperatures.
2. Both were flawed and the NOAA is currently replacing the sea temperature data. Revised data will show lower temperatures and a slower rate of warming. (The inaccurate data presented to World leaders had been collected from ships, which are known to give higher readings than isolated buoys, which will now provide the data).
3. The Land temperature data was collated with ‘unstable’ software and has never been officially verified.
4. The actual NOAA paper – underpinning Pausebuster – has still to be published. It is now agreed by the NOAA that the rushed presentation of it, contained flaws and inaccurate data.
Based on this rushed and inaccurate paper, the British Government – just one of many – has agreed to pay 320 billion pounds out of our economy by 2030.
Already we note that articles countering the above claims have appeared, most usually attempting also to discredit Dr. Bates, and the journalist, David Rose, and dubbing this ‘Fake News’. It is standard skeptic practice to discredit the messenger.
Skeptics are not sceptics. Sceptics are free thinking independent people who use data to question the status quo. Skeptics often have vested interests.
‘Fake News’ was originally used to highlight the manipulation of the Mass Media by the Clinton campaign.
However, it is a now a term being used by mainstream media and institutions with any article voicing a different opinion to conventional wisdom. For example, an article claiming that chemotherapy drugs do not cure or are an expensive waste of money might be dubbed ‘Fake news’, as would one which pointed out the dangers of vaccines. That the world spun around the sun would have been dubbed ‘Fake News’ in Galileo’s day.
Please see Junk Science? Number 99 for Part 1.
The Global Warming and climate change hoax
Jamal Munshi, Professor Emeritus at Sonoma State University is a climate change skeptic, who uses hard factual evidence and data to point out glaring inadequacies and inconvenient truths in the global warming/climate change hoax.
Going back 15 years or so, when Al Gore was winning plaudits for worrying the world about ‘Global Warming’, (how the world was becoming hotter and the seas were rising), Professor Munshi was writing papers telling us that the opposite was actually true. The 15 or so years where the seas did rise and the world became warmer had actually ceased and, if anything, the longer-term down trend in temperature and sea height was back in action.
The socially-minded left continued their concerns about greenhouse gases none-the-less. They were causing climate change.
Professor Munshi published a paper in 2016(1) explaining that, while CO2 emissions were increasing there was absolutely no evidence that this was caused by fossil fuel emissions. “Although the science of the greenhouse effect of atmospheric CO2 is well established, all efforts to relate this phenomenon to fossil fuel emissions has failed because of deficiencies in the methodology used in the presentation of empirical evidence. Circular reasoning is used in the IPCC carbon budget to relate atmospheric CO2 to fossil fuel emissions as a way of dealing with insurmountable measurement problems. No evidence exists to relate changes in atmospheric CO2 or the rate of warming to fossil fuel emissions because correlations presented for these relationships are spurious. The UNFCCC holds annual COP meetings and calls for reductions in fossil fuel emissions to attenuate global warming without evidence that warming is related to emissions.”
The fact is that we are all living on a piece of molten rock which spins as it hurtles through space. Climate change has occurred forever since we began our voyage.
We’ve had explanations for recent climate change which range from the earth has wobbled on its axis (apparently Inuit Elders think their world has shifted(2) – the sun comes up at a different angle to their forefathers days and this has caused climate change in their region(3)) and/or is the whole phenomenon caused by earthquakes(4)?
Surely some serious scientist could measure the validity of these claims, rather that the skeptic community squabbling over them?
But here’s the rub:
NASA itself is right behind the global warming thesis arguing that the earth has warmed for the past 4 decades and quoting a myriad of top Government scientific bodies who agree(5). But other experts are concerned that the figures are simply ‘fiddled’. Professor Karl Fredrich Ewart has analysed NASA’s own figures and concluded(6) that Nasa has ‘intentionally and systematically rigged the official Government figures on temperature’.
According to a review in the Daily Telegraph, the hottest year on record (2014) if measured by two different systems from space, was nothing of the sort(7). Indeed the new Global Warming Policy Foundation is so concerned about fiddled data that it has enlisted 5 top – and unbiased – experts to review the accuracy of all the data, something Professor Munshi has queried for years. “Every time you look at the latest figures, the official ones look more and more suspect”, he says.
Indeed Munshi goes further – he has questioned the whole validity of the United Nations (who play a significant role in ‘Climate Change’ along with Kyoto Summits and the like). His recent paper(8) states, “The United Nations is financed mostly by taxpayers from a few donor countries but the large and growing bureaucracy is too far removed from those taxpayers to be directly accountable to them. It is run by unelected, unaccountable, undisciplined, and incompetent bureaucrats. The organization’s size, budget, and scope are unconstrained. The budget funding process provides perverse incentives for these bureaucrats to increase the size and scope of their organization simply by creating multitudes of agencies and programs, and by inventing problems and environmental crises set on a global scale”.
Politicians and scientists inventing problems and thus programmes, taxes and jobs for the boys – whatever next?
We are always going to have climate change as long as our molten planet hurtles through space. Whether we need to be worried about our consumption of fossil fuels and CO2 emissions, if they are connected, is another issue. Frankly, it is also naïve to assume other factors like environmental pollution (not the product of us all but rather that of the poorly regulated big Chemical, Pharma, Fracking companies etc.) is not a potential factor. But not too many fingers are pointing in that direction.
Please see Junk Science? Number 100 for Part 2.
The Zika Hoax – the Washington Post backtracks
So mosquitos brandishing the Zika virus were going to bite us all. And women who were pregnant would have babies with small heads and small brains.
Yet again, this fear mongering from the global ‘Health’ community (as always directed by Big Pharma) has been turned out to be tosh – elaborate propaganda to make a few more dollars in profit, while Big Brother Health Authorities try to gain yet more control over your everyday lives. As usual, America is the epicenter of the propaganda.
Big Pharma controls the mainstream media, but every now and then up pop a couple of journalists who ask questions.
In October 2016, the Washington Post, which had been one of the leading protagonists in the propaganda hoax, published a story (1) by Dom Phillips and Nick Miroff which mentioned a few inconvenient truths.
According to their information 650,000 people in Latin America and the Caribbean had been infected by Zika, including ‘tens of thousands’ of pregnant women. But, according to WHO figures, more than 75 per cent of the babies born with small heads and neurological damage were confined to a very small region in Brazil where the original scam (sorry, scare) originated.
Scientists in Brazil are saying that other factors were prevalent, with some especially talking about environmental factors and an accidental dumping of a lavacide chemical into the rivers of that particular Brazilian region.
Despite the second highest levels of zika virus infection, Columbia has had few cases of encephaly, and has declared the problem over.
However, there are always going to be a few scientists trumpeting the fear-mongering propaganda. The latest propaganda (for which there is little scientific evidence at all) is that the encephaly problems will emerge later in life.
Meanwhile, some experts question whether Deet, the insect repellant chemical, is involved. One study (2) concluded that there had been 14 cases of infants where Deet was possibly linked to encephaly, and 71 reportings to Poison Control Centres in America. But the research is tenuous.
HPV vaccine Court cases starting in Japan
Predictably, that is if you had followed CANCERactive’s commentary on HPV vaccines from the outset rather than the Junk Science peddled by the pro-vaccine lobby, you will not be surprised to hear the court claims are now starting to be filed.
More than 60 young women with an average age of 18 have filed in various courts in Japan against the vaccine makers and Health bodies that ‘approved’ the HPV vaccines including the Government.
Vaccination of girls over the age of 11 using Cervical cancer vaccines Cervarix and Gardasil started in April 2013, but within two months the Japanese Government reversed its recommendations after excessive numbers of problems and side-effects.
However, recently new moves were being made by Paediatric Health Organisations to reintroduce the blanket vaccination schemes. This prompted lawyers and injured parties to become more vociferous.
We have detailed the side-effects and inadequate research studies on Junk Science UK before, plus the blind faith of certain key people in UK Health Organisations and even pro-Pharma cancer charities like Cancer Research UK. Over 12,000 adverse cases have been recorded, including death, following such vaccinations.
There were even pro-Pharma activists suggesting all boys needed such vaccinations when clearly boys have different biochemical pathways to girls, and no research had been conducted whatsoever.
European Union Mess likely to get worse
In 2012 John Dalli, the European Commissioner for Health, stepped down ‘to defend his name’. There were rumours flying around this Maltese politician that a tobacco company had been lobbying him, cash in hand. Dalli’s then boss Jose Manuel Barroso notified him that the EU’s Fraud office (OLAF) had been looking into the allegations and this was viewed as the first-ever ousting of a Euro Commissioner.
The whole affair was dubbed Dalligate. Dalli protested his innocence; OLAF said no payment was ever made. Many felt the tobacco company in question had been lying.
Fast forward to 2016 and the head of OLAF is actually in trouble over what went on. Head of OLAF is Fraud commissioner Giovanni Kessler. As head of OLAF he has complete immunity from almost everything. He is independent – and to preserve this independence his immunity means he cannot be fired.
Belgian police have three times asked for his immunity to be lifted. It seems that during the investigations of Dalli, Kessler listened to a conversation between two witnesses on a speaker phone. One of the witnesses had not been told Kessler was listening and that’s a criminal offence under Belgian law.
It seems he may well actually lose his immunity. But all is not that simple in the EU. Kessler was a former leader in the Italian Centre Left movement. His principal attacker is Ingeborg Grässle a member of the German Centre right, said by some to ‘be on a crusade’.
Investigations into Dalli concluded there was no criminal evidence on which to charge him. On the other hand many see the whole thing as a set up to discredit a man trying to bring in new, more restrictive tobacco laws in Europe. Indeed, Dalligate has almost become Barrosogate.
Lobbying, bribery, lies and fraud are felt likely to become the norm if the USA-EU Trade agreement gets going fully. Even under new President Jean-Claude Juncker.
Legal claims flying over anti-malarial drug Lariam
Hundreds of legal claims are being persued over the drug Lariam. Already a controversial drug after it was implicated when Staff Sergeant Robert Bales massacred 16 peaceful Afghan villagers in 2012, it was made an anti-malarial drug of last resort by the Ministry of Defence in the UK.
One wonders why it was not actually banned.
Instead the UK Commons Select Committee has thrown a claim of ‘Lamentable weakness at the MoD, because they handed out the drug to soldiers before deployment without screening them for psychiatric issues.
Roche, the manufacturers, admitted to the committee that it should not just be handed out to anyone, but even then some of the stories question the validity of the drug for any use. One Sergeant described how he spent three days just “rocking back and forwards in his tent”, calling it “an out of body experience”. Perfectly healthy Major General Alastair Duncan who was previously acting Chief of Staff for the UN, is now confined to a secure psychiatric unit. His wife fully blames the drug Lariam.
Lariam costs less than other such anti-malarial drugs, hence its use with the armed forces.
Does electing a particular President, or a Prime Minister really change anything? Apart from a few cosmetic alterations, does an Obama or a Cameron really change the lives of the population who democratically put him into office? (writes Chuck Cable)
The sad truth is, hardly at all. These elected leaders are little more than puppets. Welcome to Deep State.
But please don’t be fooled here – Deep State is not the inertia caused by non-changing departments and under-bureaucracy ever present in the descending tiers of Government or Civil Service.
Deep State is the control – increasingly, total control – of the state by vested interest. Only recently, President Putin of Russia talked of the resurgence of the ‘Illuminati’ and how he was determined to take them on. Do you think he is a complete crank? He is currently talking about revealing a report by Russian medical experts on the failings and corruption in the vaccine industry. He says Russia wants no part of the America vaccine corruption mechanism near it. He’s certainly right on that argument!
Deep state is the term given to the influence and control by certain parties over democratically elected government. Vested interest is all-powerful.
Everybody must surely be aware nowadays that it takes money to get elected. For example, ‘Big Sugar’ is run by the Fanuji brothers. One supports the Republicans, the other the Democrats. They’re not stupid. And Clinton in flagrante delicto with Monica L, apparently took just one phone call – that’s the power of Big Sugar.
Can you even get elected without a courtesy call to Mark Zuckerberg of Facebook? Or millions in donations from Big Pharma, Apple, Microsoft, Merck and the occasional oil baron? New pipeline across America? No, problem.
Is it any surprise that they expect something in return? Can you even go to war without money from the Big Banks (all under Jewish influence)? And now in California – they want child vaccinations under the control of the State, not the parent. Yes, I know there is a vote, and I know Oregon threw the law out, but the very fact that a bunch of non-elected bureaucrats think they are more competent to decide than the parent, says it all.
Did I say bureaucrats? In Europe elected MEPs passed a law (a resolution actually) to ban over 1000 chemicals of concern from everyday products you use in your home today. Result? A Euro Commissioner (un-elected) said the decision needed rethinking and appointed an unelected committee to look a it. Were lobbying and vested interests involved? Is the Pope Catholic?
In America the Committee at the CDC who approve vaccines, and key personnel at the FDA who approve drugs, seem almost interchangeable with people openly working for Big Pharma. How independent is that? And if a drug or a vaccine is approved in the USA today, how long before it is approved in the UK or Europe, without any real questions asked?
So here we are. A pound of flesh and the rest. Welcome to Deep State – the new Illuminati.
Drugs and vaccinations are given immunity from public claims for causing harm. American companies shift money around the world and avoid local taxes. Big food continues to serve up trans fat, sugar-rich junk; Wiki-leaks shows us the US Government was prepared to threaten and blackmail France if they stood up to GMO; Why, you can even attack Iraq illegally alongside George Bush and when you retire land a plum job in charge of Palestinian Peace, earning a fortune for failure their too.
As always, innocent people are suckered in. For example, every Skeptic arguing against ‘alternative therapies’ is just a Deep State troll in conflict with the fundamental Orwellian prophecies in the book they read and quoted at University. Just when they thought they were standing up for ‘liberty, freedom of speech and true democracy’ – even true science – it turns out they are just Darth Vader clones, making ever more money for the Mr Bigs, and dumping their children in ever deeper shit.
How ironic that Apple’s launch advertising back in the eighties was “1984 will not be like 1984’.