Mufti Taqi’s fatawa on Pornography on the Internet


http://reliablefatwas.com/honourable-mufti-taqi-sahib-it-is-now-too-late/NOURABLE MUFTI TAQI SAHIB – IT IS NOW TOO LATE!

 

Honorable Mufti, Its too late now!!!!!

[By Hazrat Maulana Ahmad Sadeq Desai]

Hadhrat  Mufti Taqi Sahib has issued the following fatwa:

THE PERILS OF THE ONLINE WORLD. LET US STOP DELUDING OURSELVES.

‘One of the major sinful involvement of our era is viewing the sexually explicit material online. May Allah protect us all from it. Ameen!

It is haraam (impermissible) for a person to have an Internet connection and computer devices if he cannot keep himself from viewing these material online.Throw them away!  This is an essential spiritual struggle (mujahidah) to gain Allah’s pleasure.” 26 Ramadan 1437/2 July 2016, Masjid Dar ul Uloom Karachi. (End of Fatwa)

OUR COMMENT

Mufti Taqi Sahib should take the liability of the sins of millions of Muslims for whom he had  widely opened the avenue of pornography by issuing his baatil, corrupt opinion of the permissibility of video and digital pictures of animate objects. He is responsible for the ruin of the Akhlaaq of innumerable juhala Muslims and so-called molvis who are worse than even the juhala.

The one who initiates a fitnah will have to bear the colossal and terrible burden of the sins of all those who indulge in that fitnah which he had initiated. It is now too late for the statement of condemnation of ‘sexually explicit material’. It is now of no effect to say that such porn on the internet is haraam? It is of no benefit to say “Throw them away!” The addicts of pornography will not throw the computers away.

Mufti Taqi Sahib has addicted them to the porn which once upon a time they had not dared to view. May Allah Ta’ala save us from the traps of shaitaan – Talbeesul Iblees.  May Allah Ta’ala save us from the evil lurking in our nafs – evil which the Ulama of the era present in ‘deeni’ hues.

Mufti Taqi Sahib and ourselves are on the threshold of Maut (Death) which is stalking us  every moment. The Qabr calls on us five times a day: “I am an abode of sand! I am an abode of darkness! I am an abode of worms (and scorpions and snakes, etc.)! I am an abode of torment!, etc.”

Muftis who  have deflected the masses from Siraatul Mustaqeem with their baatil, haraam and corrupt fatwas, should  reflect on Maut and the Qabr as all of us are required to do. There is not much time left  for life to end.

Mufti Taqi’s only succour now is to make valid amends by issuing a massive retraction of his baatil fatwa and then go on a campaign to denounce pictography which is the fundamental basis and root of the pornography which he now says is haraam.

Our evil will live and haunt us into the Grave and into Qiyaamah. Reckless production of corrupt/baatil ‘fatwas’ which open the gateway for fitnah, fasaad, fisq and fujoor which are all the stepping stones for kufr, is the height of satanic irresponsibility displayed by the muftis of this era. A Mufti is required to constantly hover between Jannat and Jahannam when he is about to issue a fatwa. And, this has greater applicability when the Mufti Sahib is in the twilight of life, on the verge of meeting Allah Azza Wa Jal. If this is not his attitude, he will be rudely shocked when suddenly Malakul Maut stands in his presence.

The burden of the sins of the masses shall have to be carried by the Mufti who had opened the avenue for fisq and fujoor thereby issuing a halaal certificate for the villainy which Allah Azza Wa Jal has made haraam.

Advertisements

The Benefits of Eucalyptus – Facts you need to Know


http://www.bestherbalremedies.org/eucalyptus/the-benefits-of-eucalyptus-facts-you-need-to-know.html

The Health Benefits of EucalyptusEssential Oils

The health benefits of eucalyptus is credited to its antispasmodic, anti-inflammatory, antibacterial, antiseptic, decongestant, stimulating, deodorant, and other medicinal properties.  The essential oils of the Eucalyptus tree are taken from its fresh leaves.  Although this tree has been cultivated in other countries, Australia is still the world’s primary source of eucalyptus oil.

Belonging to the hardwood species, Eucalyptus is a type of flowering tree that thrives in Australia and has about 700 varieties.  A few of its kind can be seen in the Philippines, Indonesia, Papua New Guinea and Taiwan.  Other kinds of Eucalyptus trees are grown in the tropical and subtropical regions of the earth that include China, the Indian Subcontinent, the Middle East, the Americas, the Mediterranean Basin, Africa and Europe.  Eucalyptus Globulus is its botanical name and is also known as blue gum tree, stringy bark tree or fever tree.

The Eucalyptus leaves aside from being used for home wall decorations give off a striking and clean aroma where essential oils can be obtained.  The volatile oil eucalyptol is the main active ingredient derived from eucalyptus leaves.  The oil is lucid, has a sharp taste and scent and offers a lot of benefits.  When applied on the skin, it presents an unsullied and calming sensation.  Its oil is usually used in the treatment of irritations, swellings, insect bites and other wounds.  Even though its essential oil contains all the volatile oil properties, it was never considered an aromatherapy oil in the past.  This rapid-growing source of wood caught the interest of environmentalists and researchers to explore its use in aromatherapy and traditional medicine.  The oil aside from being known to treat skin problems can also be used as a natural pesticide and at times is utilized for draining swamps to lessen the threat of malaria

Because of the medicinal uses of eucalyptus oil and the presence of a compound in the plant, it has been incorporated in a lot of over-the-counter drugs such as inhalers, rubs, rash creams, liniments and mouthwashes.  Generally used to treat respiratory distress and congestion, eucalyptus oil can also address other medical illnesses.

Using eucalyptus oil has various health benefits.  It is good for wounds, skin infections, respiratory problems, mental fatigue, fever, sinus congestion, muscle pain, dental care, diabetes and intestinal germs.

The use of eucalyptus oil in aromatherapy is steadily rising because it can be combined with other essential oils like rosemary essential oil, thyme essential oil, lavender essential oil, frankincense essential oil, marjoram essential oil, cedar wood essential oil to name a few.

How to Use Eucalyptus and Its Other Uses

Dried eucalyptus leaves have no healing powers so in order to make eucalyptus tea, you must use its fresh leaves.  To make your eucalyptus tea, get a single leaf and break it into pieces.  Put it in a big cup then add hot water and let it stay for 4-6 minutes.  Add brown sugar or honey and take small sips while it is still hot. One to two cups of this tea is good as a preventive medicine.  If you have a cough, take 4-5 big cups a day.  Give 3-4 small cups of eucalyptus tea per day for children with cough.

  • As an antiseptic put a drop of the oil to a compress above the wound to kill the bacteria.  You can also add a drop to warm water and soak the compress in the mixture and have the compress over the wound.  It can likewise be used to heal cuts, sores, burns, abrasions and ulcers as well as very helpful on insect stings and bites.
  • As an antiviral, antibacterial, antimicrobial, anti-inflammatory and antifungal, its oil has been used in a lot of medicines in treating respiratory problems because of its decongestant nature.  It is helpful in the treatment of non-bacterial sinusitis. Mixed with warm water, it can be used as a gargle to treat sore throat, too.
  • To treat skin infection, the oil must be applied on the affected skin.
  • The energizing and cooling effect of its oil assists in eliminating mental fatigue and lethargy.  Get a dark glass spray and mix 15-20 drops of eucalyptus oil, geranium or bergamot to an ounce of purified water.   This will create an aroma mist; spray it onto people who are under stress.  Patients suffering from mental confusion or disorders can similarly benefit much with eucalyptus oil as it revitalizes the spirit.
  • Use eucalyptus essential oil (also known as fever oil), to reduce body temperature caused by fever.
  • Massaging a small drop onto the temples and the spot where your forehead meet the nose can relieve any sinus congestion.
  • Its oil is an excellent means to relieve joint and muscle pains.  Apply the oil on the affected area and massage in a circular motion.   This is recommended to be used by people who are beset with lumbago, sprained tendons and ailments, rheumatism, fibrosis, aches, stiff muscles and nerve pain.
  • For dental care.  Because of its germicidal properties, it is effectual for treating dental plaques, cavities, gingivitis as well as other dental infections.
  • To boost your immune system, mix 2 drops of eucalyptus oil and lavender oil to a half cup of sea salt and blend them carefully.  Pour the mixture to have eucalyptus oil bath. Luxuriate in it for approximately 15 – 20 minutes.
  • Eucalyptus oil can also be used as an air purifier.  Put it in a diffuser and germs and airborne bacteria will be killed by it.
  • It is also good as a repellant and biopesticide.  To keep away mosquitoes, put a few drops of eucalyptus oil in a small bowl of water or on a fabric and place it in a room every day or every night.  Eucalyptus leaves and branches or its seeds can also be used as is to drive insects away.
  • Since eucalyptus oil has germicidal properties, it is also used as an element in mouthwash, room freshener, for soaps, detergents and house cleaners.
  • The mallee eucalypts is a good source of biomass for energy producers providing supplementary income for farmers.  A growing commercial woody biomass industry that has gainfully incorporated grain growing took another step to build an archetype harvester aimed to develop mallee eucalypts for supply to bioenergy processors.  Studies have shown that cineole based eucalyptus oil (5% of the fusion) thwarts the problem of separating ethanol and petrol fuel blends.  It is because eucalyptus oil has a reputable octane rating which can be utilized as a fuel in its own ability.  Production costs are still very high though to make it as a practical cost-effective fuel.

benefits of eucalpytusHowever, you also need to take some precautions in taking eucalyptus.  Anyone who is on aminopyrine, amphetamine and Phenobarbital should not use eucalyptus.

Be careful in giving eucalyptus drops to children as a few drop of it can lead to poisoning thus threatening your child’s life.  There were also reported instances where even 4-5 mm of eucalyptus caused adult poisoning.  Asphyxiation, circulation problems, a drop in blood pressure and collapse are symptoms of eucalyptus overdose.  Emergency medical treatment must be sought right away in the event of toxicity.

Root Canals- the cause for many diseases and even cancer


Root Canals

 

http://tuberose.com/Root_Canals.html

 

Cavitational Osteonecrosis

 

 

 

 

Root canals are a part of dentistry called endodontics, which is concerned with the pathology of dental pulp and the area surrounding the root. A root canal is a procedure to allow a tooth that is painful or no longer viable because of nerve damage or death to remain in the mouth. Most dentists consider root canals an advance in dentistry–superior alternative to removal of a seriously compromised tooth. However a growing number of physicians, including dentists, believe that root canals can be the cause of, or at least contribute to, a long list of illnesses and degenerative diseases.

_

A “root canal” allows a patient to keep a dead tooth in his or her mouth. The fallacy with this concept is that the body doesn’t like dead things in it and will try, sometimes desperately, to get rid of the dead thing. Notwithstanding, the fact that it may be “handy” to save a tooth for “dental convenience”, it does not change the fact that root canal treatments can devastate the human immune system.Twenty million root canals are performed in the U.S. annually, and this number is estimated to double within the next few years.

_

There are many presumptions about root canal therapy which are based in myth rather than science. The philosophy underlying the teaching of dentistry limits its practice to mechanics, pain control and aestheticsThe systemic effects of dental treatment are rarely considered. Conventional root canals have been controversial since the turn of the century, when formaldehyde was used to treat the nerve which inevitably killed it, and the bone around the tooth, as well. This treatment is still used by 20% of American dentists and is called the Sargenti method, but it is denounced by the ADA because it contains formaldehyde compounds and lead. The current formulas are said to have removed the lead, but tens of millions of root-canal treatments using the old formulas are still in people’s mouths. While the normal dental profession has been striving to improve the technique, much research has shown that even modern root canals pose health hazards to the body. This is due to the delitirious effects of residual infections; from the seepage of toxic substances still used in the process; and from the interference of the flow of bioelectrical energy through acupuncture meridians associated with all the organs of the body.

All conventional root canals still employ toxic substances to sterilize the interior of the tooth, such as eugenol (oil of clove) and formocresol(formaldehyde-creosote). Most dentists also use gutta-percha to fill the canal.

The toxicity of root canals was disclosed by Mayo’s Clinic and Dr. Weston Price jointly back in about 1910. Over a century ago. Weston Price’s textbook on root canals, published in 1922, upset the dental associations at that time, and still does today. The American Dental Association (ADA), denies his findings and claims that they have proven root canals to be safe; however, no published data from the ADA is available to confirm this statement.Statements, but no actual research.

Dr. Hal Huggins attention was drawn to the increase in autoimmune disease after the high-copper amalgams of 1975 were initiated as “state of the art” fillings, which the ADA claimed released no mercury. On the contrary, studies from Europe found that the high-copper amalgams released fifty times more mercury than previous amalgam! In watching these changes regarding the onset of autoimmune disease, he noticed a blip in the statistics—an increase in amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS or Lou Gehrig’s disease) in 1976. The actual number of cases of multiple sclerosis increased tremendously, from an average of 8800 per year during the period 1970 to 1975, to an increase of up to 123,000 in one year. That year being 1976, the birth date of high-copper amalgams.

 

 

Note an increase in 1976 and another increase in slope in 1991. In 1990, the dental association “suggested” that dentists perform thirty million root canals per year by the year 2000. Dentists accomplished that goal by 1999. The bar has now been raised to sixty million per year. The unexplainedincrease in MS (8800 to 123,000) coincided with the advent of high copper amalgams. The increase in ALS in the same year is suggestive of the same cause. ALS also increased in 1991 as more root canals were performed. Statistical coincidence?

There are bacteria in root canals that favor destruction of the nervous system and many other systems, resulting in the creation of autoimmune reactions. The common denominator is the formation of a hapten. A hapten is a small molecule that can elicit an immune response only when attached to a large carrier such as a protein; the carrier may be one that also does not elicit an immune response by itself. In general, only large molecules, infectious agents, or insoluble foreign matter can elicit an immune response in the body.

Healthy cells have a code imprinted on them. It is called the Major Histo-compatibility Complex (MHC). This is your personal code called “self.” Your body considers other code or alteration of this code to be “non-self.” The immune system is trained to kill and eliminate any “non-self” invaders. If an atom of mercury attaches to a normal healthy cell, a hapten is formed and the immune system immediately identifies that cell as “nonself.” The immune system then proceeds to kill the contaminated cell. If mercury attaches to a nerve cell, the result is a neurological disease, such as multiple sclerosis, Lou Gehrig’s disease, seizures or lupus. If mercury attaches to a binding site on a hormone, that endocrine function is altered. Mercury can attach to almost any cell in the body and create autoimmune diseases in those tissues.

Lately, it has become evident that toxins from anaerobic bacteria have the same ability to create non-self autoimmune diseases by interfering with the MHC. This is the project that Dr. Price began to study a century ago. Resistance from organized dentistry was the same then as it is today. Price wondered why dentistry was considered a “health” profession. Price was concerned about the pathological bacteria found in nearly all root canal teeth of that time. He was able to transfer diseases harbored by humans from their extracted root canal teeth into rabbits by inserting a fragment of a root canal root under the skin in the belly area of a test rabbit. He found that root canal fragments from a person who had suffered a heart attack, when implanted into a rabbit, would cause a heart attack in the rabbit within a few weeks. Transference of heart disease could be accomplished 100 percent of the time. Some diseases transferred only 88 percent of the time, but the handwriting was on the wall.

Dr. Price discovered that root canals have within them bacteria capable of producing many diseases. They have no place in the body. Which is more important? The life of the tooth or the life of the patient? This is still the primary argument facing us today.

ROOT CANALS AND NEUROLOGICAL DISEASE

Considering the difficulty of culturing anaerobic bacteria, it was hard to identify them with 1920s technology. Most of the bacteria reported by organized dentistry at that time were aerobes of unknown significance. Today, with DNA analysis available, anaerobic bacteria (the dangerous kind) can be identified whether dead or alive by the presence of their tell tale DNA signatures.

The goal of dentistry is to save teeth. Root canals allow dentists to maintain many teeth for years instead of extracting them. But is this goal appropriate considering the biological expense exposed with DNA research? What is more important? To save the life of the tooth or that of the patient?

HAVENS FOR BACTERIA

Dr. Price, while head of research for the nowdefunct National Dental Association, took one thousand extracted teeth and reamed them out as dentists normally do, prior to filling the canals with wax. Price sterilized the canals with forty different chemicals far too toxic to be used in a live human situation; he wanted to see whether the canals could be permanently sterilized. After forty-eight hours, each tooth was broken apart, and cultured for the presence of bacteria. Nine hundred ninety out of one thousand cultured toxic bacteria just two days after treatment with chemicals designed to make the tooth sterile. Where did these bacteria come from?

An overview of the structure of a tooth shows the outer layer, known as enamel, the second layer, known as dentin, and the inner portion, known as the pulp chamber, where the nerve lives. On the outside of the tooth is what is called the periodontal ligamentTeeth are not attached directly to bone.Fibers come out of the tooth and intertwine with fibers coming out of the bone, and they unite to form what is called the periodontal ligament.

The second layer of the tooth, the dentin, is not really solid but composed of tiny dentinal tubules. In a front tooth, if all these tubules were attached end to end, they would reach over three miles. The tubules have adequate space to house many thousands of bacteria. This is where the bacteria were hiding in the thousand teeth Price tested. From the dentin tubules, bacteria can migrate either into the pulp chamber, where space is left as the gutta percha—a natural form of rubber used to fill the space inside the cleaned-out root—shrinks upon cooling, rebounding from the force applied to push the wax down the canal, and losing the liquid portion, or into the periodontal ligament where a plentiful supply of food awaits them.

 

A tooth has one to four major canals. This fact is taught in dental school, but never mentioned are the additional “accessory canals.” Price identified as many as seventy-five separate accessory canals in a single central incisor (the front tooth). There is no way that any dental procedure can reach into these accessory canals and clean out the dead tissue. This necrotic tissue creates a home for multiple bacterial infections outside the tooth in the periodontal ligament. With added food supply from this area, the anaerobic bacteria can multiply and their toxins can contribute to the onset of disease.

The root apex (terminal end) is the primary area of concentration of infection. Even though this may be the last area to show infection, dentistry generally considers a tooth sterile unless areas of bone resorption show up on X-ray. Upon cooling and shrinking of the gutta percha, space is left at the apex in which bacteria can thrive, where neither white blood cells of the immune system, nor antibiotics can reach them.

TOXIC MICROORGANISMS

Hal Huggins’ first DNA studies examined bacteria retrieved from crushed root tips. Science can identify eighty-three different anaerobic bacterial species with DNA testing. Root canals contain fifty three different species out of these eighty-three samples. Some are more dangerous than others, and some occur frequently, some occasionally. Selecting those that occur more than 5 percent of the time, he found:

Capnocytophaga ochracea
Fusobacterium nucleatum
Gemella morbillorum
Leptotrichia buccalis
Porphyromonas gingivalis

Four affect the heart, three the nerves, two the kidneys, two the brain and one the sinus cavities. Let’s look at five major bacterial species lurking in root canals more closely, keeping in mind that these are only five of the fifty-three that are routinely found in root canal teeth.

Capnocytophaga ochracea: Found in brain abscesses associated with dental source of infection. Causes human disease in the central nervous system. Also related to septicemia and meningitis.

Fusobacterium nucleatum: Produces toxins that inhibit fibroblast cell division and wound healing processes. Causes infection in the heart, joints, liver and spleen.

Gemella morbillorum: Linked to acute invasive endocarditis, septic arthritis and meningitis.

Leptotrichia buccalis: Reduces the number of neutrophils (a critically important white blood cell), thus lowering immune competence.

Porphyromonas gingivalis: Destroys red blood cells by drilling holes (porins) in them, causing the cell to “bleed to death.” Low red cell counts that do not recover after dental revision are frequently responding to the porin activity of this microbe. P. gingivalis also alters the integrity of the endothelial lining of blood vessels, which leads to inflammation and bleeding in the inner lining of blood vessels. This is the key step in formation of atherogenesis that leads to heart attacks. P. gingivalis can change friendly bacteria into pathogens.

Shouldn’t we question the wisdom of supplying a haven for these microbes so close to our brain and circulatory system? Does this information validate the claims of “sterile” root canals? Dentists claim they can “sterilize” the tooth before forcing the gutta percha wax down into the canal. Perhaps they can sterilize a column of air in the center of the tooth, but is that really where the problem is? Bacteria wandering out of the dentinal tubules is what Price was finding, and what we were finding in the crushed tooth samples. But the problem doesn’t end there.

Huggins tested blood samples adjacent to the removed teeth and analyzed them for the presence of anaerobic bacteria. Approximately 400 percent more bacteria were found in the blood surrounding the root canal tooth than were in the tooth itself. It seems that the tooth is the incubator. The periodontal ligament supplies more food, therefore higher concentration of bacteria. But the highest pathological growth was in the bone surrounding the dead tooth. Looking at bacterial needs, there is a smorgasbord of bacterial nutrients present in the bone. This explains the tremendous increase in bacterial concentration in the blood surrounding the root canal tooth. Try sterilizing that volume of bone.

Just the presence of dead tissue will cause the immune system to launch an attack. Infection, plus the autoimmune rejection reaction, causes more bacteria to collect around the dead tissue. Every time a person with a root canal bites down, these bacteria are flushed into the blood stream, and they start looking for a new home. Chemotaxis, or the chemical attraction of a specific bacteria for a specific tissue, assists the anaerobes in finding new quarters in the heart, nervous system, kidney, brain, etc., where they will perform their primary damage.

Many of the bacteria in the surrounding bone are present in far more than 50 percent of the samples tested. Streptococcus mutans was found in 92 percent of the blood samples. It can cause pneumonia, sinusitis, otitis media, meningitis and tooth decay.

Streptococcus mitis was found 92 percent of the time. This microbe attacks the heart and red blood cells. It is a hearty bacteria, for it went to the moon (hiding in a camera) on an unmanned expedition, stayed there over two years in an environment without atmosphere, exposed to temperatures of 250 degrees Fahrenheit during the day, minus 250 in the shadow. Upon returning to Earth with the astronauts of Apollo 12, over two years later, this microbe was still alive. In humans, S. mitis binds to platelets and is involved in the pathogenesis of infective endocarditis. You don’t want this guy living in your dead root canal tooth.

Of the top eight bacteria in the blood adjacent to root canal teeth, five affect the heart, five the nervous system, two the kidney, two the liver, and one attacks the brain sinus, where they kill red blood cells. Of these, Prevotella intermedia (present in 76 percent of the samples) attacks heart, kidney and sinus; Strep intermedius (present in 69 percent of the samples) attacks heart, nerves, lungs, liver and brain.

DNA examination of extracted root canals has shown bacterial contamination in 100 percent of the samples tested. This is quite the opposite of official claims that root canals are 97 percent successful. They need a new definition of success.

CAVITATIONS

Cavitations are the next big problem that result from dental procedures. Cavitations are areas of unhealed bone left over after a tooth extraction. Dentists are generally taught to remove a tooth and leave the periodontal ligament in the socket, a procedure which would be like delivering a baby and leaving the placenta in the uterus. These socket areas with the ligament left in place rarely heal. After tooth removal, a cap of about 2 millimeters (one sixteenth of an inch) covers the extraction site, leaving a hole the size of the root of the tooth behind. In records of five thousand surgical debridements (cleaning) of cavitations, only two were found to be healed. When the periodontal ligament is left in the bone, the body senses that the tooth is still there, and the order for healing is canceled. These holes are lined with many of the same bacteria found in root canal sockets, but actually more different species. Whereas root canal teeth contain up to fifty-three different species of bacteria, cavitations yield up to eighty-two of the eighty-three test for.

 

Of the five most frequently present bacteria found in cavitations, three affect the heart, two the nervous system and one the kidneys and lungs. They are as follows:

Streptococcus mutans (occurrence 63 percent of the samples), affects the nervous system, can cause pneumonia, sinusitis, otitis media and meningitis. It has also been blamed for causing dental decay in teeth, but this may be more the result of the fluid flow pulling bacteria into the tooth than actual active invasion by the bacteria.

Porphyromonas gingivalis (occurring in 51 percent of the samples), damages the kidney, alters integrity of endothelial lining of blood vessels, and induces foam cells from macrophages, contributing to atherogenesis. It contains proteases that lyse red blood cells and extract nutrients (primarily iron) from the red blood cells. This action is called porin forming, which can destroy red blood cells rapidly. (By the way, P. gingivalis can both up and down regulate about five hundred different proteins critical to maintaining our normal biochemical actions.)

Candida albicans (present in 44 percent of the samples), in its yeast form is beneficial in the process of demethylation of methyl-mercury as well as its ability to destroy pathogenic bacteria in the intestinal tract. When converted into the fungal form by a shift in pH in the digestive system, candida can penetrate the intestinal wall, leaving microscopic holes that allow toxins, undigested food particles, bacteria and other yeasts to enter the blood stream. This condition is sometimes referred to as Leaky Gut Syndrome, which can lead to environmental intolerances.

Prevotella intermedia (occurrence rate of 44 percent) has as its primary concern coronary heart disease (CHD). P. intermedia invades human coronary artery endothelial cells and smooth muscle cells. It is generally located in atheromatous plaques. Cellular invasion of cardiac muscle is central to the infective process.

ANTIBIOTICS

Antibiotics cannot be used in infections of this nature. Most antibiotics are “bactericidal”—think suicidal, or homicidal. When bactericidal antibiotics kill a bacterium, the bacterium explodes. The fragments are not eliminated immediately, for each piece is a lipopolysaccharide called endotoxin. By way of contrast, exotoxins are the toxic chemicals that are released by pathogenic bacteria, and endotoxins are toxic entities (fragments of the original bacteria) that are the result of the bacterial explosion caused by the antibiotic. Endotoxins present a huge challenge to the immune system, for now, instead of facing one bacterium, it has to process and eliminate perhaps one hundred endotoxins. With dozens of bacteria to confront from each single root canal or cavitation, no one antibiotic can kill all of them, and if there were one, the resulting dead bacterial corpses would overwhelm the body and produce either greater disease or death.

Broad spectrum antibiotics cannot be used for this reason. Sometimes even one capsule of antibiotic produces more problems than the immune system can tolerate. Plus, it takes only two or three capsules to completely sterilize the gut of its four or more pounds of friendly bacteria. Antibiotics are far more powerful and potentially devastating than anyone ever thought they were. Antibiotics should be used with ultra caution, not routinely given for ten days or so after oral surgery, “just in case.”

There are other ways to get these microbes under control, and several are being tested at this time. It is advantageous to have intravenous vitamin Cand occasionally a non-killing antibiotic is added to this solution. This combination does reduce the challenge to the immune system, but, overall, root canals represent a rock-and-hard place situation.

Leave the root canal or cavitation in the body, and there is the potential of creating an unwanted autoimmune or degenerative disease that could be life threatening. Toxins and bacteria can both leak from these contamination sites wreaking havoc with a person’s cardiovascular, endocrine, nervous and immune systems. The public needs to be informed, so they can make educated choices in the trade-off between toxic convenience and health.

Removing the offending tooth presents problems that must be confronted, or other problems can be induced—problems not as dangerous as the continuous bacterial spill, but ones that need to be avoided if possible. In order to allow the immune system to focus on healing, all other offending dental materials should be removed (mercury, copper, implants, tattoos and nickel crowns) so that the immune system can deal with the bacterial challenge instead of the bacteria plus toxic metals. Nutrition should be calculated from the aspect of the blood chemistries commensurate with one’s ancestral diet and in line with the dietary principles formulated by Dr. Price. Recovery from a root canal is complicated, but your life is worth salvaging.

These studies in DNA analysis of bacteria in root canals and cavitations confirm the fact that Dr. Weston Price, despite being one century ahead of his colleagues, was absolutely correct in determining that bacteria-laden root canals have no place in the body of people interested in their health. This toxic waste spill can be stopped, but not with the assistance of dental associations, which continue to insist that the procedure of root canals is perfectly safe. The recent increase in suggested quota up to sixty million root canals per year is not in the best interest of their patients, nor can that action do anything but increase health costs for the innocent patient.

Root canals are not worth the price.

In the 1950s. Reinhold Voll, a German M.D., using an electro-acupuncture biofeedback system he had developed, discovered that each tooth in the mouth relates to a specific acupuncture meridian. He found that if a tooth became infected or diseased, the organ on the same meridian would also become unhealthy. Conversely, he found that a diseased organ could cause a problem with its corresponding tooth.

When you have a root canal, or even a big filling, or crown or anything that is not compatible with the body, it sets up an interference field, blocking or altering the energy meridian passing through it. It will affect different parts along that meridian, different organ systems in the body. And usually will cause it to have a problem as well.

If the tooth is removed, the energy does tend to pass through it. However, without the tooth in the bone, it is still altered. Without stimulation from a tooth, blood circulation and lymphatic drainage will be impaired, and the bone and tissue surrounding the extraction site can become diseased and die. Infections in the teeth, and toxins, have no place to go but down; down into the jaw bone and into the rest of the body, creating systemic pathologies.

Of equal interest is the relationship of root filled teeth to traditional Chinese medicine and body energies. All teeth are linked to the body via acupuncture meridians and having a root filled tooth, a large amalgam filling, a crown, or anything that is not compatible with the body, on a meridian may set up an interference field, blocking or altering the energy flow ( the chi ‘) passing through this meridian and cause a disease in an organ or body function remote from the tooth. For example a front upper incisor is on the Kidney/ Bladder meridians and having a root treated tooth here may cause gynecological problems, kidney problems, impotence, and sterility if you follow a Chinese medicine theme. These teeth also relate to spinal segments and joints, the front incisor relates to the coccyx and posterior knee and to L2, 3, S 3, and 6.

If the tooth is removed, the energy does tend to pass through it; however, without the tooth in the bone, it is still altered. Without stimulation from a tooth, blood circulation and lymphatic drainage will be impaired, and the bone and tissue surrounding the extraction site can become diseased (cavitations) and die. Infections in the teeth and toxins have no place to go but down; down into the jawbone and into the rest of the body, creating systemic pathologies. Some dentists are trained to look for these areas on X-rays and Cavitat procedures and when these areas are treated they can also bring considerable improvements in patients health. This energetic relationship between teeth and the rest of the body is opening whole new avenues of dental care and the chance for dentists to work with other complementary health workers.

It is assumed in dentistry that the extent of bone loss is a direct indication of the amount of infection present. This is a false assumption because the bone loss may take time to develop. The extent of the bone loss about the end of the root is also a function of the body’s immune system being able to isolate the infection process. It has little to do with the degree of infection. Sometimes there is no bone loss, but instead, a condensation of bone about the end of a dead tooth. Dentists are taught that this indicates a lack of infection. The reality is that teeth showing a Condensing Osteitis are demonstrating that the body’s immune system is incapable of quarantining the infection locally. These are often the teeth which cause the greatest systemic effects.

The toxins generated by the root canal can combine with the mercury leaching from the amalgams and create new chemicals of a much higher toxicity.Some combinations can be more potent than Clostridiumbotulinum (responsible for botulism). Any time you bite down, you are potentially squirting a few molecules of dental poisons into the bloodstream-and often it only takes a few molecules to create a serious problem.

“Root canals” cause:

Suppression of the immune system

The creation of an “interference field” on the meridian that the particular tooth is on (meridian – a channel of energy that flows between different tissues, organs and structures).

_

The production of the most toxic organic substance known to man.

Root-canal fillings can cause serious side effects. Dr. Weston price is recognized as the greatest researcher that the dental profession has ever produced. Dr. Price, after observing many patients with crippling degenerative diseases not responding to treatment, suspected infected root canal-filled teeth to be the cause. He then embarked on a 25-year-long study to see if his suspicions were correct. This study was done during the first 3 decades of the 20th century! However this information was not shared with us when we were dental students so we had a big void in our dental education where root canals are concerned.

_

The Procedure

After numbing the tooth, a hole is then drilled in the top of the tooth, just as if a filling were being placed. The hole is deepened until the internal canal (pulp chamber), containing the nerve, blood and lymph vessels, is reached. Then, little tiny files are used to remove the contents of the chamber (live, dead, or dying pieces of nerves and blood vessels). The dentist now has access to the whole length of the root-canal. Front teeth are supposed to have one, but may have an additional one splitting off of the main canal about one-third of the way up from the apex. These will not show up on X-ray. Multi-rooted teeth, such as some bicuspids and most molars, have two or three roots. Each root has a primary canal and may have a secondary one as well. Lower molars frequently have two canals in one root that sort of blend into each other, forming what is called a ribbon canalCurved canals present a problem, as the files used to cut out infected dentin are straight.

_

Sometimes a file will penetrate the tooth at the curve, and cut its way out of the tooth, missing the curve entirely. Toward the bottom 10 millimeters of the tooth, accessory canals may exit the tooth. Removing the dead tissue and bacteria from each of the canals presents the problem of not being able to see whether all the contents are removed. It’s a dark tiny hole, down a long skinny root, and bacteria and debris are smaller. Knowing when to stop at the apex is another trick. X-ray films are shadows, and show an approximation of how long the root is, but they don’t provide detail about the end of the root. Filling the canal to the x-ray end would actually overfill the canal. Overfilling is a condition most often apt to create infection, thus the presence of unwanted bacteria.

The now empty canal is widened. Next, a series of treatments is begun which clean and shape the root-canal, which kills the toothIt is then flushed, treated with chemicals to kill bacteria, and eventually filled with one of a variety of materials, the most popular (93% in U.S.), is a substance calledgutta-percha. Gutta-percha is a rubbery, wax petroleum-based, latex material, to which some people are allergic. First, the wax is mixed with chloroform to make it soft. Since gutta-percha does not show up on x-rays, heavy metals, including mercury and lead, are added, to make it radiopaque–sometimes up to 20% of its content. Other chemicals it may contain include formocreasol or para­chlorophenol. These substances can cause inflammation and infection, allergic reactions, and compromise the immune system.

Eugenol-based cements are used to cement the gutta percha cones into the enlarged canals. Eugenol has an acid pH, whereas the living tissues that surround the root have an alkaline pH. To kill the bacteria, caustic solutions are flushed into them, but the surface tension of the solutions is too high to allow it into the narrow dentin tubules. Sodium hypochlorite (Clorox) and hydrogen peroxide mixtures are used to “sterilize” the inside of the main canals. Sodium hypochlorite and hydrogen peroxide both will injure tissue. These cause inflammation and infection, allergic reactions, and compromised immunity.

Dr. Weston Price found that teeth retain their sterility at best for only about two days. Most lost sterility within less than twenty four hours. Studies on thousands of teeth have demonstrated the presence of bacteria in 80% to 90% of the canals after they have been “sterilized.” The primary bacteria found in root canals by Dr. Price included streptococcus, staphylococcus, and spirochetes. He found 90% of the bacteria in the teeth that produced the patients’ acute diseases were streptococcus and 65.5% of the time they belonged to the fecalis family. Bacteriologists today have confirmed that Price’s discoveries were accurate.

_

Once the root-canal treatment is completed, the top of the tooth in which the hole was drilled is restored with either a filling or crown, depending upon the amount of tooth that remains. A patient is routinely told that a crown will be needed for strength because root-canal treated teeth become brittle and weak because of the inside, including the blood vessels and nerves, having been drilled out to do the treatment. It is quite possible that there will be little of the original tooth left above the gum line and that which is left will be weak. In many cases, a post is placed into the root-canal itself to hold the crown.

_

Compatibility

Conventional dental procedures do not take into account biocompatibility of the filling materials, potential injury to surrounding tissues due to the caustic nature of substances used and a high percentage of residual bacterial contamination. According to research by Dr. Boyd Haley of the University of Kentucky, at least 75% of root canal teeth have residual bacterial infections remaining in the dentinal tubules, of which there are 3-5 miles in length in each tooth. There is no drug, homeopathic remedy, vitamin or mineral that can effectively kill these tiny bacteria that live in the small tubules in the tooth. Only the use of bio-frequencies (Rife technology) has the capability of pentrating the surrounding bone and root without any damage to tissues. Even then, there is no way to stop new bacteria from entering these tubules from the oral cavity again. These lingering infections produce the most toxic substances known to biochemistry and toxicology, that enter the blood stream and can affect any part of the body.

_

A dentist, Weston A. Price, brought this information to light in the 1940s. Unfortunately for patients and the dental profession, his scientific documentation and views were pushed aside. To date there is no acceptable conventional therapy to resolve this issue.

_

Focal Site of Infection

A tooth is an organ, just as any other organ or bone in the body. An abscessed or gangrenous tooth is not only a dead tooth, it is a dead organ. The problem arises because these teeth are dead and prone to infection can threaten to infect surrounding tissue, including the jawbone, possibly triggering cavitations.

Today we know that the toxins made by the bacteria that live by the billions in root-canal teeth contain the most toxic organic substance known to manthio-ethers. Thio-ethers are 1000 times more toxic than botulism toxin, which used to be considered the most toxic organic substance.

_

So, from a practical standpoint, one would be well-advised to worry less about anthrax and smallpox, and instead, focus on root canals which are much more likely to cause you personal harm. In addition to thio-ethers, other severe toxins from these root-canal bacteria include thio-ethanols andmercaptans which have been found in the tumors of women who have breast cancer, draining through the lymphatic system down the cervical chain of lymph nodes and ultimately in to the breast tissue. Besides being harbored in root canals, these dangerous bacteria also take up residence incavitations which result from most extracted teeth. Thus one can get a “double-whammy” from the root canals and the cavitations.

Dr. Weston Price

Based on a 25 year extensive study by respected researcher, Dr. Weston Price, scientific data suggests that root canal therapy is the cause of many systemic diseases and illnesses.Dr. Price devised a testing method which disclosed the presence of infection in a tooth which otherwise seemed to be healthy–that is, the implanting of the root canal filled tooth under the skin of a laboratory animal. He found that when the root-filled tooth of a patient with a degenerative disease was extracted and imbedded in an animal, that animal would develop the patient’s disease. He did this in over 5000 animal studies and the results were consistent. In the beginning, Dr. Price did not know just where the infection was hiding in the tooth, only that a patient’s illness was rapidly transferred from his root-filled tooth to laboratory animals in case after case.

_

Dr. Price was able to culture the bacteria in root-filled teeth and trap their toxins, reproducing a disease in a rabbit by implanting the extracted root-filled teeth and injecting the cultured material into the animal. Dr. Price discovered a wide variety of degenerative diseases to be transferable to rabbits.This involved diseases or conditions such as endocarditis and other heart diseases, kidney and bladder diseases, arthritis, rheumatism, mental diseases, lung problems, stomach ulcers, ovarian diseases, phlebitis, osteomyelitis, and pregnancy complications. Those infections proved so devastating thatmost animals died with 3-12 days. When these same teeth were sterilized with steam heat and embedded in animals, no adverse health effects were experienced. Furthermore, a large percentage of people recovered from their illnesses after extraction of the root canal filled teeth used in the experiments.When sound, uninfected natural teeth were implanted in animals, no adverse health effects were experienced. This vitally important research was forced underground, and has remained virtually unknown since its 1923 publication.

_

Although root canal therapy is usually successful in eliminating pain and swelling associated with dead teeth, and in allowing those dead teeth to remain in the mouth to function, the side effects can be hazardous to overall health. It is estimated that only about 30% of the population has a healthy enough immune system to ward off the side effects. The problem is that root canal therapy cannot sterilize the inside of the tooth. As a result, the trapped bacteria mutate and migrate to infect the heart, kidneys, eyes, stomach, and countless other body tissues. This theory, called the focal infection theory, states that a person can have an infection someplace and that the bacteria involved can be transferred by way of the bloodstream to another gland or tissue and therein start a whole new infection. Modern experiences also support this theory. Dr. Issels, a German physician, recommends extraction of root canal teeth as part of his protocol for terminal cancer patients.

Over the last 40 years with 16,000 patients, he has observed a 24% total remission rate. Some transplant surgeons require root canal filled teeth be extracted before performing transplant surgery, because of the risk of focal infection to the new organ from the teeth. If a person has chronic health problems, existing root canal filled teeth or dead teeth should be suspected as a possible cause or influence. Estimates for 1996 ran as high as thirty-five million recipients of root canal therapy; however, most cannot describe the procedure beyond the basics. Root canal or endodontic therapy is performed primarily because of bacterial infection. Frequently pain is the motivating factor. Bacteria infiltrating through the dentin tubules under decay can set up housekeeping in the pulp chamber. This is an ideal environment, being warm, with a constant supply of nutrients, and a waste removal system. Bacteria can wiggle into the dentin tubules (miles-long passageways that traverse the dentin of each tooth) and multiply in accordance with the available oxygen supply.

Since there are varying degrees of oxygen deprivation, each level of oxygen stimulates the bacteria to mutate into a slightly different bacterium; a whole plethora of critters can develop from just one bacterium. Over 150 different bacterial strains have been identified at the apex or within the pulp chamber of dead or dying teeth. All but five are classified as anaerobic, or those that thrive in the absence of oxygen. These bacteria produce toxic waste products. The toxins can either be picked up by the drainage system at the apex of the tooth, or flow down the dentin tubules into the periodontal ligament. At the ligament, they can slip into the fluids around the tooth and flow into the bloodstream. They may also be forced up the ligament space into the mouth when the person bites down or chews. Regardless of which direction the toxins go, they will be introduced to the innermost parts of the body.

The root canal treated tooth is a tooth that is typically still being used in normal chewing. While much of the nerve and blood supply has been removed or damaged by the procedure itself, the tooth still has its original attachment to the jawbone. The high pressures generated in chewing can be expected to physically push toxins out of the socket where they can eventually be picked up by the blood circulation.

 

____

Dentinal Tubules

A tooth is basically comprised of 3 layers. The enamel (what we see when we look at another person’s teeth, the hard, white attractive outer layer of the tooth), the pulp (a tiny island of soft tissue at the center of the tooth – the same place in a tooth that a core would be in an apple – the so-called “nerve”), and the dentin. Dentin accounts for about 90% of the tooth. When looked at under a microscope, dentin has a very specific structure. It is made up of “millions” of incredibly tiny tubules that radiate outward from the pulp to the outer edge of the tooth.

If one could some how take each of one of these “millions” of tubules in a front tooth and lay them end to end, they would stretch for 3 miles. Although microscopic in size, these tubules are adequate to house billions of bacteria and even yeast and fungi. The tubules are wide enough to occomodate eight streptococci abreast. These dentinal tubules are like tiny pipes that radiate outward from the pulp to the outer surface of the tooth–kind of like spokes of a wheel (if you think of a cross-section of a tooth). The centers of these tubules are filled with living protoplasm. The protoplasm in these tubules has no blood supply so it depends on the blood vessels in the pulp for it’s nourishment or sustenance.

Dentin tubules within the root of the tooth can harbor millions of bacteria. These tubules extend from the pulp chamber to the outer bounds of the tooth called the cementum. The periodontal ligament and the apex of the tooth still contain bacteria from the original infection. It is impossible to sterilize the tubules, the ligament, or the apex. Since 93% of root canal treated teeth in the U.S. are filled with gutta percha, and the purpose of filling the canal is to seal the canal from access by bacteria, several basic principles must be ignored to pronounce the canal “sealed.” First, the wax is mixed with chloroform to make it soft. The chloroform evaporates, creating 6.6% space that was occupied by the chloroform. Instruments used to condense the gutta percha are heated in order to soften the wax. When heated wax cools, it shrinks–up to 30% in the first week after placement. This allows a half-micron-sized bacterium to easily make it through the apex, up the root, and into the dentin tubules.

The relatively huge white blood cells cannot get into a dentin tubule. Antibiotics can’t gain access either. And the periodontal ligament access is difficult if not impossible. Debris from filling the canal spills out the end of the root, forming a good culture medium for bacteria, while providing a barrier for entrance into the canal. Anaerobic bacteria (those living without oxygen), can inhibit phagocytosis of the white blood cells. Root canal bacterial waste products are the real problem. No white blood cell or antibiotic can destroy the chemicals that are produced by bacteria around the root canal treated tooth.

_

These chemicals kill the most important enzymes in our bodies at lower concentrations than the most toxic of known organic poisons. Disease can result when these are present at little more than the molecular level of concentration. Mercury at 1 to 5 micromolar concentrations will totally abolish the activity of tubulin without any noticeable effect on other brain proteins. Even one-half part per billion can destroy the most resistant enzymes.Inactivating these essential enzymes can lead to many hormonal neurological, autoimmune, and emotional diseases.

_

In the presence of these root canal poisons, tubulin and creatine kinase, two critical proteins involved in brain function, are inactivated within a few minutes. In a healthy person, the immune system will form pus, soreness, tenderness, and pain–to tell us dead teeth do not belong there. The dentist, anxious to protect his investment in the root canal, will usually prescribe broad-spectrum antibiotics in an effort to calm the situation. Antibiotics will eventually halt the inflammatory process around the root canal tooth, and the pain will subside, but there is no repair.

The doctor and patient are now lulled into the illusion that the root canal is successful, but the body undergoes further protective activities; if it cannot loosen up the tooth and exfoliate it, the body builds a wall around it and set up a quarantine, a dense layer of calcium, called condensing osteitis is laid down around the root, giving the x-ray appearance of healed bone. The bacteria cannot invade the body, nor can the white cells invade the tooth. Even though cells cannot cross the calcium barrier, nutrients can get through to nourish the isolated bacteria, and the toxins can flow into the body unimpeded, to set up disease. There is intense resistance from the dental profession to admit to the potential of root canal teeth being a primary source of “incurable” diseases today. The legal profession and insurance carriers aren’t anxious to confront these problems. The root canal tooth can then start the usually silent process of ischemic osteonecrosis (cavitations) in the bone marrow, that can then spread and destroy the blood vessels and nerves supplying adjacent teeth.

Millions of people are ill, suffering from degenerative diseases for which the medical profession is at a loss regarding cause and treatment; the degenerative disease problem continues to bankrupt our people and country. Once a “root-canal” is done to a tooth, the pulp is gone (sacrificed) – which makes a root canal tooth a dead tooth–an expensive, dead tooth. Now the protoplasm in these miles and miles of dentinal tubules dies, and these tubules become a “dandy” place for bacteria to hang out. They have “free eats” on the dead, decaying protoplasm in the tubules.

These tubules are 1 to 1.3 microns in diameter–big enough to accommodate bacteria, but too small to allow entry of white blood cells (which are the body’s principal way of controlling excessive bacterial populations). Now your root-canal tooth becomes a bacteria factory. The bacteria now are cloistered away from the body’s defenses and thus have free reign to proliferate. Existing inside the tooth, these bacteria have no access to air so they mutate into the anaerobic form–the kind that can live in the absence of air. When the bacteria mutate, their metabolism changes so that they give off waste products that are incredibly toxic. These toxins include thio-ethers, thio-ethanols, and mercaptans (see “Cavitations“).

Root canals are a primary cause of chronic disease


Tue. July 9, 2013 by Thomas E. Levy, MD, JD

http://www.naturalhealth365.com/natural_healing/root_canals.html

(NaturalHealth365) What is a root canal treatment and could this be the cause of chronic disease? Such a treatment, typically just called a “root canal,” refers to a dental procedure commonly performed today on a badly decayed or infected tooth, and are an overlooked cause of chronic disease, often with the patient presenting with pain.

The procedure removes much of the connective tissue with associated nerves and blood vessels that comprise the pulp deep inside the tooth. Coarse files of gradually increasing diameter through an access hole in the top of the tooth are used to scrape and scrub out as much of the pulp as possible. A filling or sometimes a crown can complete the procedure.

The root canal-treated tooth is a chronic toxin factory

After such a treatment, most dental patients are relieved of pain and are able to satisfactorily chew with the treated tooth. This would be great if there were no other consequences. However, the pulp is designed by nature to be sterile.

A treated tooth always ends up chronically infected, but since much of the nerve complex has been removed, pain is not usually perceived even if the tooth is trying to tell the rest of the body that something is wrong as pathogens produce their toxins and continue to multiply. These toxins are incredibly potent, and they are released “24/7” into the draining lymphatics and venous blood from the jawbones, where they subsequently spread throughout the body.

Over 5,000 consecutive extracted root canal-treated teeth were found to have a wide array of infectious agents and associated toxins.

Toxins and pathogens deplete the antioxidant stores of the body, and chronic disease is the expected result.

All toxins are pro-oxidant, and they actually inflict their damage by using up the protective antioxidant stores of the body, allowing vital biomolecules throughout the body to become oxidized and lose their normal function. Josef Issels found that fully 98% of his advanced cancer patients had “between two and ten dead teeth,” which virtually always included root canal-teeth.

Root canal-treated teeth can be the primary cause of chronic disease, and they can always be expected to worsen pre-existing chronic disease.

As all disease eventually boils down to selected areas, tissues, and organ systems of the body having chronically increased oxidative stress, the pro-oxidant toxins of root canals promote all diseases at the cellular level. If you have one or more root canals, or if you are planning on getting one, ingest a broad spectrum of quality antioxidant supplements on a regular basis if extraction and cleaning of the socket(s) are not possibilities for you.

Remember, however, that it is very difficult to “dry off while you are still in the shower.” Repairing tissue damage while tissue is continuously being damaged at the same time is a stand-off, at best.

Looking for natural health solutions? Sign up now – for our free, weekly show featuring the greatest minds in natural health and science plus a free gift!

About the author: Thomas E. Levy, MD, JD is a board-certified internist and cardiologist. He is also bar-certified for the practice of law. He has written extensively on the importance of eliminating toxins while bolstering antioxidant defenses in the body, with particular focus on vitamin C. His upcoming new book will be released in a few months, entitled, Death by Calcium: The Toxic Supplement.

For more information about Dr. Levy – visit: PeakEnergy.com

References:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/?term=23146639
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/?term=23418311
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/?term=23604464
Issels, J. (2005) Cancer: A Second Opinion. Garden City Park, NY: Square One Publishers, Inc. (http://www.amazon.com/Cancer-Second-Opinion-Josef-Issels/dp/075700279X/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1372861367&sr=8-1&keywords=josef+issels)
Kulacz, R. and T. Levy (2002) The Roots of Disease. Connecting Dentistry and Medicine. Philadelphia, PA: Xlibris Corporation (http://bookstore.xlibris.com/Products/SKU-0014557002/The-Roots-of-Disease.aspx)

To help in finding a dentist who appreciates the above concepts (you need to make sure your selected dentist fully understands and agrees with what you want):
http://www.hugginsappliedhealing.com/
http://biologicaldent.com/
http://iaomt.org/find-a-doctor/search-for-dentist-physician/

SUBSCRIBE TODAY! Click here to join the NaturalNews Inner Circle – a monthly (online) subscription offering exclusive audio interviews, video events, natural health product discounts, free gifts plus much more!

Pranic Pregnancy And Parenthood.. the natural way


To some, it may come as a surprise that Camila Salas only ate five solid meals throughout her entire pregnancy. But for Camila, nourishing her own mind, spirit and body, as well as the body of her unborn child, through fresh juice and the cosmic life energy of breath is part of her practice of Pranic Living. In this piece, Camila and her partner Akahi share how this state of consciousness results in love, joy and deep connection, as well as a healthy pregnancy and a new version of the parent-child relationship.

Pranic Consciousness is the awareness that the life source is co-creating in abundance through each being, in all of life, manifesting through us as life in physical form as well as the ability to create, interact, and experience on infinite levels. On larger scales, Prana is creating galaxies, planets, and sustaining the Universe breath by breath.

This state of consciousness is not only a lifestyle, way of thinking or being. It is the basic information that we as beings possess innately. When we surrender to being vessels to a Greater Intelligence, our lives take a course that goes beyond what we could have imagined, presenting us with opportunities, resources, people, and experiences that enrich us and fulfill this greater purpose that we came to explore. The basis is joy, a joyful understanding that everything that occurs is a perfect part of the journey, giving us new wisdom and integrating more this intelligence into our lives.

As Pranic/Breatharian beings, we live in unity with the Cosmic Energy, and as parents conscious that our children are light beings who come directly from the source, we are here to help them not forget who they are and experience the love, happiness, creativity, and magic of the life together, in balance with nature and all elements of creation. Each child comes to life already desiring to explore certain aspects, attracted to specific types of learning and interactions, just as we ourselves have been. We have the opportunity to observe how best to offer these abundant resources for a fluid and natural parent-child relationship and life experience.

Our transition into Pranic Living happened in 2008, two years before the conscious conception of our first son. The stabilizing of the Prana within made it so that in the moment we were ready to conceive, everything happened with ease and from the joyous state that we are permanently living in. The conception was immediate, the pregnancy developed smoothly and so enjoyably, and the natural birth of our son was an amazing initiation into this journey of conscious parenting that we are now deeply exploring.

During the pregnancy I, Camila, continued drinking only fruit juices and herbal teas. I didn’t feel the need or desire to eat solid foods and during the entire nine months I ate 5 times, all of which were in social situations where the experience catered to a beautiful exploration of the flavors. My blood tests during all three trimesters were impeccable, showing balance and purity. Iron levels remained stable and at the average level for even women who are not pregnant, never presenting signs of anemia or sugar imbalances and regular pregnancy check ups with the midwife and OBGYN confirmed the above average growth of a very healthy baby boy.

Pranic Living goes far beyond the food free aspect. It is an intelligent spirit that illuminates and heals our lives and our genetic lineage and the “hereditary” information that is generally passed on through the generations. This means the elimination of such things as thought and emotional cycles, behaviors, tendencies, habits, and the physical manifestations of these in the form of illness or other syndromes. Because of the profound reprogramming Pranic Living provides the reproductive systems, the sperm, and ovarian eggs are purified, opening the space for our children to grow in and be born through a place of no past energetic charge, and truly be the beginning of a new generation. We now observe this in our children and have also been able to observe ourselves through Breatharian/Pranic pregnancy, birth, and parenthood as we redefine family and love, the parent-child relationship, and the roles we all play in this team that we comprise. Beyond any “parenting label” we are instinctual parents, meaning that by knowing our children profoundly through our experiences and interactions of responsiveness, not being reactionary, we follow what feels the most natural and harmonious, parenting from the heart and not the theory, so we can continue to be creative and learn together as a family.

This topic of purification of the genetic lineage is very important because it is the basis of conscious parenting. When we as parents are aware that through us and our families we are refining the generations, refining the humanity, a deeper comprehension of our roles as parents is revealed to us, because automatically our consciousness guides us to refine our words, thoughts, actions, and emotions, giving us a valuable understanding of the information we share with our children, the way in which we do so, and the impact this can have on the development and evolution of that being.

To refine humanity also means to manifest the desire that our children have a life even more marvelous than our own has been, not only economically but also in terms of education, comprehension, support, and help. The best education exists within the parents. Children of all ages are constantly stimulated, learning from the actions that they observe in their parents, and with a brilliant intelligence they try to simulate and be a reflection of us. As parents we have the great honor of being the focus of attention of our children, to be that being who inspires them to learn about life. We are thus given the opportunity to bring this attention to the good things and conscious values that we know will be essential for their development within the humanity as limitless creative beings who count with a great source of energy and resources, the existential support from the cosmic intelligence.

From the Pranic Consciousness perspective, being parents we feel that we are refining the generations by filtering the information that we allow to reach our children with more care and precision. In this same way we let go of the obsolete information that we received from our own parents so as not to pass it on to our children.

We are in a flourishing new humanity in which the children who are being born at this time are, in many cases, souls who are experiencing Physical life for the first time. They come with pure DNA of light and love, so the integration of these beings into this dimension and physical form should be channeled softly with family fundamentals of love.

We refine humanity and the education in our homes by giving support and confidence to our children so they may develop their gifts and talents. The children of this era are born with a new spectrum of intelligence from which we will see flourish new sciences and technologies for the future of humanity. As parents aware of these energetic changes we must learn to observe, accept, and channel these energies within our families. It’s important that we empower ourselves with what we’ve learned from the past and now give back something new and fresh in our present. Beyond the fact that on our planet there have occurred natural and social catastrophes, the families of the world have the possibility to liberate themselves of the memories, traumas, and family karmas so that the DNA of our children and next generations continue on, being pure and divine.

Akahi and Camila Salas are parents and Pranic Breatharian teachers, who have been sharing processess of conscious evolution for over 15 years. Their work has involved children for the past nine years in projects in different countries throughout South America, specifically in Ecuador, Peru, and Bolivia. These projects have always been focused on artistic education leading towards the discovery and development of the talents and gifts unique to each being. Both professional artists, practitioners of natural and ceremonial medicine, having for many years experimented with vegan and raw foods diets, in 2008 they underwent the spritual initiation of the 21 Day Fast, a process to callibrate their bodies to the capacity to live from Light.

After this spiritual initiation they first experienced the non necessity of food, for the following two years they drank only juices, not eating any solid foods. After the integration of the prana as their energy source they entered into a new stage of profound and practical comprehension, receiving the channeled information that educated them on the conscious utilization of the Cosmic Energy.

Scientific research on the breathing therapies and processes that they currently share worldwide has proven an increase in the amount of life force in the energy field, resulting in longevity, in a balancing of the functions of the nervous system and internal body organs, as well as generating lasting mental and emotional clarity, and the healing of chronic physical diseases. They are most known for their work globally in the facilitating of the 8 Day Process, a transitional process for Living On Light.

http://www.birth-institute.com/alternative-medicine-and-childbirth/pranic-pregnancy-and-parenthood

MMR (Measles, Mumps and Rubella)


http://thinktwice.com/mmr.htm

What is MMR?
MMR is an abbreviation for measles, mumps, and rubella — three common childhood illnesses up until the mid-1970s. Vaccines are available for each of these diseases. However, in the 1980s they were combined into a single “three-in-one” MMR shot.

How is the MMR vaccine made?
According to the U.S. manufacturer, Merck & Company, Inc., the current MMR vaccine — MMR-II — contains attenuated live measles and mumps viruses propagated in chick embryo cell culture, plus “the Wistar RA 27/3 strain of live attenuated rubella virus propagated in WI-38 human diploid lung fibroblasts.”(1) Principal studies published in theAmerican Journal of Diseases of Childrenand the American Journal of Epidemiology, reveal that the rubella strain was cultured from an aborted human fetus.(2,3) In addition, the growth medium for the three live viruses that are needed to produce the MMR vaccine is a buffered salt solution “supplemented with fetal bovine serum.”(4) Other ingredients include sucrose, phosphate, glutamate, recombinant human albumin, sorbitol, hydrolyzed gelatin stabilizer, and approximately 25 mcg of neomycin (an antibiotic).(5) The MMR vaccine does not contain a preservative. In fact, according to the FDA, MMR-II never contained thimerosal, a potentially dangerous chemical used in some vaccines.(6) However, trace amounts of mercury were detected in an earlier MMR formulation.(7)

How safe is the MMR vaccine?
The drug company that makes the MMR vaccine publishes an extensive list of warnings, contraindications, and adverse reactions associated with this triple shot. These may be found in the vaccine package insert available from any doctor giving MMR, and in the Physician’s Desk Reference (PDR) at the library.(8,9) The following afflictions affecting nearly every body system — blood, lymphatic, digestive, cardiovascular, immune, nervous, respiratory, and sensory — have been reported following receipt of the MMR shot: encephalitis, encephalopathy, neurological disorders, seizure disorders, convulsions, learning disabilities, subacute sclerosing panencephalitis (SSPE), demyelination of the nerve sheaths, Guillain-Barre’ syndrome (paralysis), muscle incoordination, deafness, panniculitis, vasculitis, optic neuritis (including partial or total blindness), retinitis, otitis media, bronchial spasms, fever, headache, joint pain, arthritis (acute and chronic), transverse myelitis, thrombocytopenia (blood clotting disorders and spontaneous bleeding), anaphylaxis (severe allergic reactions), lymphadenopathy, leukocytosis, pneumonitis, Stevens-Johnson syndrome, erythema multiforme, urticaria, pancreatitis, parotitis, inflammatory bowel disease, Crohn’s disease, ulcerative colitis, meningitis, diabetes, autism, immune system disorders, and death (Figure 49).(10,11)

How effective is the MMR vaccine?
Prior to the introduction of the measles, mumps and rubella vaccines, thousands of cases of measles, mumps and rubella occurred every year. Today, these numbers are greatly reduced. However, unlike the natural diseases, the MMR vaccine does not confer permanent immunity. For example, measles epidemics regularly occur in vaccinated populations. According to the CDC, “measles transmission has been clearly documented among vaccinated persons. In some large outbreaks…over 95 percent of cases have a history of vaccination.”(13) Outbreaks of mumps and rubella often occur in vaccinated people as well.(14) Evidently, immunity is short-lived. The Journal of the America Medical Association published data showing that antibody levels after rubella vaccinations fell to half their high point within four years.(15) The medical literature contains many examples of MMR vaccine failures. Thus, people who receive MMR may still be susceptible to the three diseases.

In a study conducted by scientists from the Direct Health 2000 clinic in Eltham, South London, England, half of all children vaccinated with MMR were found to have “zero or very low immunity” against measles and mumps. According to Dr. Sarah Dean, who oversaw the study, “This means there could be a lot of children who think they have got the umbrella protection” yet remain at risk. Dean believes that young children’s immune systems cannot cope with more than one virus at a time.(16) Yet, a second dose of MMR was added to immunization schedules.

The British Medical Journal published a survey of doctor’s and nurse’s attitudes toward booster doses of MMR. Fifty-one percent of all U.K. doctors and nurses had reservations about or disagreed with the policy of giving an MMR booster shot, and 80 percent of all U.K. doctors would not “unequivocally recommend” the second dose to a wavering parent (Figure 50).(17)

MMR and Autism 

Many parents report that their perfectly healthy children became autistic after receiving the MMR vaccine. The affected children were developing normally, then regressed after receiving the triple shot, losing their previously acquired skills. The medical community vociferously denies any connection between the MMR vaccine and autism. However, in 1998Lancet published a landmark study by Dr. Andrew Wakefield linking the onset of autistic symptoms to the MMR vaccine.(21) Wakefield and his world-class team of medical experts investigated previously normal children who subsequently suffered from intestinal abnormalities and regressive developmental disorder, including a loss of acquired skills. In most cases, “onset of symptoms was after measles, mumps, and rubella immunisation.”(22) Further research uncovered a possible explanation:

 

“Atypical patterns of exposure to common childhood infections — measles, mumps, rubella and chickenpox — have been associated with autism and autistic regression…. A close temporal relationship in the exposure to two of these infections during periods of susceptibility may compound both the risk and severity of autism…. Although historically, these rare patterns of exposure may have accounted for only a small proportion of autism, the widespread use of a combination of the candidate agents in a single vaccine [MMR] may have changed this.”(23)

 

An earlier study published in theAmerican Journal of Epidemiologyidentified in utero and infant exposures as periods of apparent susceptibility, when both the brain and immune system are undergoing rapid development.(24) Thus, fetuses and young children are especially prone to adverse consequences if they contract two or more viral infections concurrently. Wakefield elaborated on the increased perils of being exposed to more than one virus at a time:

 

“One important pattern of infection that may increase the risk of delayed disease is where different viruses interact, either with each other or both interact with the host immune system simultaneously. Virologic data support the possibility of a compound effect of multiple concurrent viral exposures influencing…the risk of autism.”(25)

 

Is it safer to receive MMR as three separate shots?
Dr. Wakefield theorized that if a child who is exposed to two or more wild viral infections around the same time is at increased risk for autism, then a child who is injected with three live viruses via the MMR vaccine is equally susceptible to the ailment, if not more so. Thus, Wakefield proposed separating the measles, mumps and rubella vaccines from the three-in-one MMR shot — the way they were in the 1970s prior to being combined — and administering them individually over the course of several weeks or months. His solution would satisfy immunization recommendations designed to protect against the three diseases while safeguarding against the risk of autism:

 

“If, following thorough independent scientific investigation, it emerges that autistic…disorders are causally related to a compound influence of the component viruses of MMR, whether these viruses have been encountered naturally or in the vaccine, then through judicious use of the vaccines, one may have a means for preventing the disease [autism]. Spacing the single vaccines, thereby dissociating the exposures that, together, may constitute the risk, provides a way of not only preventing the acute measles, mumps and rubella infections, but also, potentially, the risk of one of the most devastating diseases that it has been our misfortune to encounter.”(26)

 

For families that elect to vaccinate their children, Wakefield’s proposal to separate the shots seems like a prudent approach, especially since recipients of MMR are being injected with three different live viruses — contained within a chemical mixture of three diverse and potent drugs — all at once. Furthermore, the medical and scientific literature contains documentation linking the MMR vaccine to a multitude of serious adverse reactions. The MMR vaccine manufacturer, plus numerous unsolicited personal stories, confirm the tragic possibilities.(27) Thus, when Wakefield’s research was first publicized, concerned parents quickly rejected the MMR vaccine and demanded instead the individual shots. Several doctors initially supported Wakefield’s recommendation and complied with their clients’ requests. However, the individual measles, mumps and rubella vaccines are capable of causing severe adverse reactions as well. These are also listed by the vaccine manufacturer and documented in numerous studies.(28)

MMR was initially administered as three separate shots, rarely at the same time. Thus, early reports of adverse consequences could be attributed to a particular vaccine. Later, when the three-in-one MMR vaccine replaced the individual vaccines it became much more difficult to link a bad reaction to either the measles, mumps, or rubella portions of the shot. Today, MMR is often given in combination with other vaccines as well, making it even more difficult to determine whether one vaccine in particular caused an adverse reaction, or if all of the vaccines given at once simply overwhelmed the recipient’s immune system.

Note: In January 2010, a British medical panel concluded that Dr. Wakefield had violated ethics rules, prompting The Lancet to retract his 1998 research paper which suggested that MMR may be linked to autism. However, according to Wakefield, “the allegations against me and my colleagues are both unfounded and unjust and I invite anyone to examine the contents of these proceedings and come to their own conclusion.”

Listen to Dr. Andrew Wakefield In His Own Words.

Why are the three vaccines combined?
The three vaccines — measles, mumps and rubella — are combined into a single shot for convenience, not safety or efficacy. In fact, when 180 Swiss physicians analyzed 320 scientific works from around the world, they concluded that..

 

 

ADVERSE REACTION REPORTS

 

This section contains unsolicited adverse reaction reports associated with the MMR vaccine. They are typical of the daily emails received by the Thinktwice Global Vaccine Institute.

[MMR114] My 12-month-old received his MMR shot on a Friday. The following Friday he had a 104 degree temperature and became violently ill. The doctor said it was a stomach virus. But on Monday morning he woke up with a rash all over. I took him to the doctor and was very upset to learn that this is very common.

[MMR128] Recently, my 13-month-old had his MMR. He now has constant high fevers and seizures, which he never had. He is a totally different boy. This is devastating.

[MMR176] My friend’s 15-month-old daughter received an MMR vaccine. Within eight days she was hospitalized with a 104 degree fever and a skin rash. My friend called to see what I could find out about Stevens-Johnson syndrome. They told her that her daughter may die as a result of this.

[MMR203] A dear friend lost her 15-month old daughter two weeks after her MMR. She was healthy and showed no signs of illness yet died suddenly in her sleep one afternoon. The post mortem revealed a viral infection and traces of pneumonia, but her mother and I find it very hard to believe that the vaccination wasn’t to blame.

[MMR216] Three days ago my friend’s 15-month-old daughter was hospitalized after experiencing a high fever and her first seizure. The hospital put the baby through a series of tests, including a CAT scan and CBC. My friend told me he thought it was a reaction to the MMR vaccine she recently received. However, the doctors were puzzled as to the cause and disallowed this explanation.

[MMR315] When my daughter was just over one year old, she received her MMR vaccination. Later that day she had a high fever, and I put her to bed. I was busy doing housework downstairs and got this “mother’s intuition” that something was wrong. I rushed upstairs to find her blue and not breathing. I called a nurse. My daughter seemed to be convulsing, so I was instructed to reach down her throat to open her air passage. She was rushed to the hospital and they immediately put her into a cool bath. She was in the hospital for almost a week. Had it not been for my gut feeling that something was wrong, my baby would not be with me today.

[MMR317] Our son developed seizures after his MMR vaccine at 14 months. Today, after two years of anti-epilepsy medications, he has totally regressed. We decided to stop all medications five weeks ago and his grand mal fits have stopped. We are now left with a child experiencing severe constipation and bowel problems.

[MMR321] One week after the MMR shot for my 16-month-old daughter, she had diarrhea. The next day she had three seizures. What steps should be taken once a reaction has occurred. I want to be sure it is documented and the government is made aware.

[MMR398] My daughter had a serious reaction to the MMR shot when she was 22 months. She developed brain damage after a fever of 106 degrees. She also has seizures which are unresponsive to medication, damage to the nerves of her eyes, and learning disabilities that she battles every day. We took her case to court and lost. The doctor who testified on their behalf stated that the government only called him in when they wanted a finding in their favor. What a setup! Of course they don’t have to live with the frustrations and expense of raising these vaccine-damaged children.

[MMR402] Three days after my daughter received her MMR vaccine, she started blinking her eyes and sniffling a lot. She’s been doing this for 2 1/2 months now. Is there a link between the MMR vaccine and facial tics?

[MMR436] My 12-year-old had a seizure within 10 minutes of his second MMR. His head rolled side to side and his arms jerked a couple of times. He was unaware of this, so he must have blanked out. Afterwards, he felt woozy, very tired, and had a headache at the bridge of his nose. Also, his arm that got the shot was numb. The feeling in it gradually returned over the course of an hour.

[MMR443] I have a 15-year-old daughter. I recently moved to the U.S. from the U.K. without her medical records. Upon arrival we were required to give her complete immunizations. I strongly objected, but felt pushed into re-immunization because of state laws to get her into school. After her second MMR she has been complaining of dizzy spells and continuous headaches. Is there a link between over-immunization of MMR and this sickness?

[MMR509] Today, shortly after I was inoculated with the MMR vaccine, I began feeling faint and short of breath. After ten minutes of holding my head between my knees in a dirty gas station bathroom, I decided I could drive the 20 miles home.

[MMR518] I had an MMR shot about three year ago and have suffered from many reactions to this vaccine since.

[MMR552] When I was a child I was given the MMR vaccine. Almost seven days to the hour I became ill: fever, sweats, throwing up even the slightest amount of fluid or food. This went on for a month or so. The doctors would not even consider that the shots caused the illness. Later, they wanted me to have the second MMR; my parents refused. The doctors went through the usual tantrums and said I wouldn’t be able to attend school. When my parents said ‘Fine, he won’t go,’ the doctors gave in. At about the age of 18, I had a blood screening and was told I didn’t have all of the MMR vaccine. Forgetting the episode as a child, I let them give me the shot. Seven days later I was sick again, but not as severe.

[MMR580] My college refused to admit me without an MMR vaccine. I had a terrible reaction and was rushed to the hospital with piercing screams, a high temperature and delirium. Now I have trouble focusing, and can be scattered and forgetful. I can’t stand change and don’t seem to have the energy and drive that I once had. My family thinks I developed obsessive-compulsive disorder. I am very bright, but nearly blew my scholarship after the shot.

[MMR588] I was told by the nursing school where I am enrolled, “No vaccine, no school.” Even though I had all the normal vaccines as a child, I was unable to show this. Five days after I received the MMR vaccine, I was so ill that I ended up in the emergency room. The doctor told me that the MMR did not cause my sickness, and my nursing school supervisor said it was a virus. Why does the medical establishment deny vaccine reactions? Why can’t they tell us this important information and let us make educated responsible decisions. The irony is that I got the vaccine and now I’m so sick that I can’t go to school

Adverse reaction and Death after MMR Vaccine( Measles, Mumps, Rubella)


http://therefusers.com/refusers-newsroom/889/#.U3OCI_mSxOI

MB Comment: Anyone who feels pressured into taking the MMR vaccine because of the current stupendous measles epidemic (3 measles cases reported in WA State so far in 2011 – no deaths, no reported complications) might want to watch this video first. Key point: The baby developed encephalitis (brain inflammation) and was diagnosed with measles virus in the cerebrospinal fluid. That is precisely the medical textbook definition of a vaccine adverse reaction.

If you think such events seldom occur, I found 6 FDA Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) reports of rapid-onset encephalitis after MMR or MMRV vaccination so far in 2011 in Washington State (in the same period as those 3 measles cases without reported complications). There is NO FOLLOWUP for VAERS cases so we don’t know how those WA state vaccine victims turned out, but the symptoms of post-encephalitic syndrome are consistent with autism. Please watch the video linked below and then read the six VAERS reports from WA State (at the bottom of this article). You can extract the full reports by VAERS ID# at medalerts.org

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Adverse reaction and Death after MMR Vaccine

When a child dies of measles the story hits the headlines. But when children die after the MMR jab, their stories are hard to find. This is the sad story of Harriet Moore told by her Mum.

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Six VAERS reports of encephalitis or Guillain-Barre syndrome (paralysis) after measles vaccination, WA State, Jan-April 2011.

Note: These vaccines were mostly administered along with other vaccines, which is the ritual most patients face. This confounds direct association of adverse events with specific vaccines, which presumably is exactly the technique the CDC and pharmaceutical companies use to cover their tracks. There are no safety studies (concerning the risk of autism) done on multi-vaccine combinations – which is what most patients get.

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
MMR
VAERS ID:    414376      Vaccinated:    2011-01-04
Age:    5.0      Onset:    2011-01-06, Days after vaccination: 2

SMQs:, Neuroleptic malignant syndrome (broad), Anticholinergic syndrome (broad), Dystonia (broad), Parkinson-like events (broad), Noninfectious encephalitis (broad), Noninfectious meningitis (broad)

+++++++++++++++++++++++
MMR
VAERS ID:    415005      Vaccinated:    2011-01-10
Age:    1.9      Onset:    2011-01-18, Days after vaccination: 8

SMQs:, Dystonia (broad), Parkinson-like events (broad), Noninfectious encephalitis (broad), Noninfectious meningitis (broad)

++++++++++++++++++++++++++
MMR
VAERS ID:    417619      Vaccinated:    2011-02-23
Age:    4.0      Onset:    2011-02-24, Days after vaccination: 1

Symptoms: Dyskinesia, Screaming, Somnolence, Vertigo, Vomiting
SMQs:, Acute pancreatitis (broad), Neuroleptic malignant syndrome (broad), Anticholinergic syndrome (broad), Dementia (broad), Dyskinesia (narrow),Noninfectious encephalitis (broad), Noninfectious encephalopathy/delirium (broad), Noninfectious meningitis (broad), Gastrointestinal nonspecific symptoms and therapeutic procedures (narrow), Hostility/aggression (broad), Vestibular disorders (narrow)
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
MMR
VAERS ID:    419004      Vaccinated:    2011-03-15
Age:    17.0      Onset:    2011-03-15, Days after vaccination: 0

SMQs:, Torsade de pointes/QT prolongation (broad), Peripheral neuropathy (broad), Hyperglycaemia/new onset diabetes mellitus (broad), Neuroleptic malignant syndrome (broad), Anticholinergic syndrome (broad), Arrhythmia related investigations, signs and symptoms (broad), Parkinson-like events (broad), Guillain-Barre syndrome (broad), Noninfectious encephalitis (broad), Noninfectious encephalopathy/delirium (broad), Noninfectious meningitis (broad), Accidents and injuries (narrow), Vestibular disorders (broad), Ocular motility disorders (narrow)

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
MMR
VAERS ID:    420648      Vaccinated:    2011-03-14
Age:    51.0      Onset:    2011-03-28, Days after vaccination: 14

SMQs:, Cardiac failure (broad), Anaphylactic reaction (broad), Angioedema (broad), Systemic lupus erythematosus (broad), Anticholinergic syndrome (broad), Dementia (broad), Dystonia (broad), Guillain-Barre syndrome (broad), Haemodynamic oedema, effusions and fluid overload (narrow)
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

MMRV
VAERS ID:    414182      Vaccinated:    2011-01-05
Age:    1.1      Onset:    2011-01-05, Days after vaccination: 0

SMQs:, Acute pancreatitis (broad), Neuroleptic malignant syndrome (broad), Anticholinergic syndrome (broad), Arrhythmia related investigations, signs and symptoms (broad), Dementia (broad), Pseudomembranous colitis (broad),Noninfectious encephalitis (broad), Noninfectious encephalopathy/delirium (broad), Noninfectious meningitis (broad), Gastrointestinal nonspecific symptoms and therapeutic procedures (narrow), Hostility/aggression (broad)

Hemophilus Meningitis Vaccine Linked To Diabetes Increase


BALTIMORE, MD — May 7, 1999 — The British Medical Journal published a Research Letter written by Dr. J. Bart Classen, an immunologist at Classen Immunotherapies, supporting a causal relationship between the hemophilus vaccine and the development of insulin dependent diabetes.

The data is particularly disturbing because it indicates the potential risks of the vaccine exceeds the potential benefit. The findings are expected to allow many diabetics to receive compensation for their injuries and lead to safer immunisation.

The data pertains to a study initiated and funded by Classen Immunotherapies which was performed using medical records of Finnish children. The study looked at the rate of diabetes in children receiving four or one dose of a weak, early generation, hemophilus vaccine and compared to the rate in children who received no vaccine. The children were followed for 10 years.

In the group receiving four doses of vaccine the rate of diabetes was elevated by 26 percent after seven years compared to children receiving no doses. There were an extra 58 cases of diabetes per 100,000 children immunised in the group receiving four doses of vaccine compared to children receiving no doses. This is equivalent to 2,300 cases of diabetes a year in the US, which has an annual birth rate of about four million children. However, even more cases of diabetes are expected with newer hemophilus vaccines which are in use today.

By contrast, immunisation against hemophilus is expected to prevent seven deaths and seven to 26 cases of severe disability per 100,000 children immunised in Finland.

The data shatters the prevailing myth that the benefits of vaccines far exceed the risks. The data is expected to allow many diabetic children to receive compensation for their illness. Each case of insulin dependent diabetes is estimated to cost on average over $1 million US in medical costs and lost productivity.

“Unfortunately, many public health officials and researchers funded by groups threatened by the findings continue to try to deny the association. This may prolong the financial burden of diabetics deserving compensation,” Classen added.

In a letter published by the British Medical Journal, Classen describes analytical methods used by public health officials which may give readers the perception that the effect is smaller than it really is.

The news is not all bad for the vaccine field. The findings are expected to lead to changes in immunisation practices which will lead to a decline in childhood diabetes. Immunisation starting in the first month of life has been associated with a decreased risk of diabetes and is one method being considered to make immunisation safer.

Related Link: British Medical Journal

The perversion of gynecology and vaginal exams…..


Why are doctors sticking their fingers into women’s vaginas?

You might have wondered why doctors routinely perform bimanual exams (insertion of fingers into the vagina) during pelvic examinations. Well, if you asked your doctor for an explanation you might not get one because doctors themselves are a bit vague about the purpose of bimanual exams. In fact, the lack of clarity extends all the way up to the American Congress of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG), where “the reasoning behind the performance of the exam is not defined” (http://www.ajog.org/article/S0002-9378%2812%2902070-4/fulltext).

Doctors’ uncertainty about the purpose of the exam can lead to inappropriate practices, over-diagnosis, potentially harmful over-treatment and devastating outcomes. A recent research study involving 521 obstetrician-gynecologists revealed the extent of the uncertainty and lack of consistency among doctors. Doctors taking part in the research study were presented with patient scenarios and then asked whether or not they would perform a bimanual exam.

The first scenario involved an 18 year old female who was there for a routine health visit, had become sexually active one month ago, had no history of dysplasia, had no symptoms, and was not pregnant.  Doctors were asked if they would perform a bimanual exam on this 18 year old female and the vast majority (87%) indicated that yes, they would perform the exam.  This is alarming because apparently the majority of doctors are unaware that exams are not recommended by ACOG in asymptomatic females under the age of 21.

In another scenario doctors were presented with a 55 year old woman who had come in for a routine health visit.  Her cervix and ovaries had been removed one year earlier at time of hysterectomy for fibroids.  She had no history of dysplasia and no symptoms.   In spite of the absence of all reproductive organs, and even though ACOG’s current guidelines recommend against exams on women who have had a total hysterectomy, almost all of the doctors indicated they would perform a bimanual exam on this patient.

Of the 521 obstetrician-gynecologists involved in the study, 47% believed that bimanual exams were very important in the detection of ovarian cancer.  This is in direct contrast to the ACOG endorsement that ovarian cancer screening is not recommended.  Ovarian cancer screening is not recommended based on research which shows that the harms of screening outweigh the benefits.   Some of the harms include unnecessary surgeries following a false-positive diagnosis, unnecessary psychological distress, and harmful over-treatment.

The research findings regarding doctors’ uncertainty about bimanual exams and their inappropriate overuse of the exam helps highlight the need for further education.  The lack of clarity among doctors regarding the purpose of the bimanual exam at least helps to explain many doctors’ silence and failure to offer women informed consent or an explanation prior to performing the exam.

Thank you to Karen for her enlightening comments and references:http://forwomenseyesonly.com/2013/04/19/sexual-abuse-under-guise-of-health-care-presents-barriers/comment-page-1/#comment-27383

References

http://www.ajog.org/article/S0002-9378%2812%2902070-4/fulltext

http://online.liebertpub.com/doi/pdfplus/10.1089/jwh.2010.2349

http://forwomenseyesonly.com/2012/09/30/battle-brewing-over-pointless-pelvic-exams/

http://forwomenseyesonly.com/2013/12/29/why-are-doctors-sticking-their-fingers-into-womens-vaginas/

 

The antibiotics that could kill you


By Martin J. Blaser

(CNN) — In 2010, Americans were prescribed 258 million courses of antibiotics, a rate of 833 per thousand people. Such massive usage, billions of doses, has been going on year after year.

We have few clues about the consequences of our cumulative exposures. We do know that widespread antibiotic treatments make us more susceptible to invaders by selecting for resistant bacteria.

These risks are now well-known, but I want to lay out a new concern: that antibiotic use over the years has been depleting the pool of our friendly bacteria — in each of us — and this is lowering our resistance to infections. In today’s hyperconnected globe, that means that we are at high risk of future plagues that could spread without natural boundaries from person to person and that we could not stop. I call this “antibiotic winter.”

Martin Blaser

To explain: In the early 1950’s, scientists conducted experiments to determine whether our resident microbes — the huge number of bacteria that live in and on our bodies, now called our “microbiome” — help in fending off invading bacteria. They fed mice a species of a typical invader, disease-causing salmonella. It took about 100,000 organisms to infect half of the normal mice. But when they first gave mice an antibiotic, which kills both good and bad bacteria, and then several days later gave them salmonella, it took only three organisms to infect them. This isn’t a 10 or 20% difference; it’s a 30,000-fold difference.

That was in mice, but what about humans? In 1985, Chicago faced a massive outbreak of salmonella. At least 160,000 people became ill and several died from drinking contaminated milk. The health department asked victims of the outbreak and unaffected persons, “Have you received antibiotics in the month prior to becoming ill?” People who said yes were five times more likely to become ill than those who drank the milk but hadn’t recently received antibiotics.

People carry a small number of highly abundant bacterial species and a large number of much less common ones. For example, you may carry trillions of Bacteroides thetaiotaomicron in your colon and only a thousand cells, or fewer, belonging to many other species. We are not sure how many rare species any of us has. If you had only 50 cells of a particular type, it would be difficult to detect them against the background of trillions of others.

When you take a broad-spectrum antibiotic, which is the kind most commonly prescribed, it may be that rare microbes occasionally get wiped out entirely. And once the population hits zero, there is no bouncing back. For your body, that species is now extinct. My worry is that some of these critical residential organisms — what I consider “contingency” species — may disappear altogether.

Why might it matter? Those puny species may not be so inconsequential. Microbes multiply. Any small population of, say, 50 cells can explode into a billion or more in one week. The trigger for their massive bloom could be a food you’ve eaten for the first time, which only they have the enzymes to digest. In the presence of this food, the rare microbe goes into overdrive, doubling every 12 or 20 minutes, multiplying by a million percent or more.

Study: Sinus infection? Skip antibiotics

This could be good for you because some of the energy captured by these digesting microbes might end up in your bloodstream. When food is in short supply, as has been the case for most of human existence, and people need to eat unfamiliar plants or animals, it is useful to have a repertoire of enzymes that help us process a wide variety of nutrients. The genes of our flexible partners, our resident microbes, provide those enzymes.

Now consider the consequences if one of your rare microbes — an ancient one that has been dwelling in Homo sapiens for 200,000 years — went extinct. One possibility is that it doesn’t matter. Perhaps that microbe was a marginal player — good riddance. Another possibility: It’s a “contingency” organism, useful — crucial — when we need it for protection.

When a new influenza epidemic arose in Mexico in 2009, people in California and Texas soon fell ill, and then flu appeared in New York a few days later. After a few weeks, this flu spread throughout the world. Considering the numbers of people infected, we were lucky that it was not a highly lethal strain. Yet thousands of people all over the world did die. Even when a strain is not that virulent, when hundreds of millions of people are infected, deaths add up. And when the strain is worse, the deaths climb into the millions.

Our world has gotten smaller. We have much greater global access to one another — at the very moment in our history when our ancient microbial defenses are degrading. This makes us vulnerable to microbial invaders and provides fuel for disease conflagrations, with consequences scarcely imaginable.

Plagues are inevitable wherever people congregate. With a global population of 7 billion, rising by 80 million annually, the question is not whether another big plague will come, but when it will happen, what will cause it, and who will be affected. In 1918-19, influenza killed tens of millions, in an era without airplanes and with much less mass transit to spread it. With a huge world population that is essentially contiguous, and with so many people with weakened defenses, we are vulnerable as never before.

I see many parallels between our changing climate and our changing microbiome. The modern epidemics — asthma and allergic disorders, obesity, and metabolic disorders — are not only diseases, they are external signs of change within. But they also indicate a deeper imbalance, the loss of our reserves.

Our diverse microbes, with their millions of genes helping us resist disease, are the guerrilla warriors defending the home domain — as long as we protect them. But recent studies suggest that otherwise normal people already have lost 15% to 40% of their microbial diversity and the genes that accompany it.

This is the greatest danger before us — invaders causing an epidemic against which we are helpless. Unless we change our ways, we do indeed face an “antibiotic winter.”

We must end the assault on our microbes, by cutting antibiotic use and also such elective practices as unnecessary cesarean sections that bypass the natural order of mothers passing on their bacteria to their babies. There are times when both of these are needed urgently, but we already know that we are overusing them.

Technology already provides important tools to improve doctors’ judgments about when antibiotics are needed, but we must get them into the clinic. We also must develop new tools, like “narrow-spectrum” antibiotics that target only the invader and minimize collateral effects.

We must understand that every antibiotic course has a biological cost, and more precisely align possible benefit with the full costs. I predict that in the future we will routinely be giving children back their lost microbes, in early life to restore their patrimony and after the antibiotic courses that are truly necessary.

Just as we have abused marvelous inventions like freon and the internal combustion engine, so too we have abused our “wonder drugs.” But the possible costs of these practices are our worst nightmare; we need to prepare, starting now.

Follow us on Twitter @CNNOpinion.

Join us on Facebook/CNNOpinion.

Groundbreaking Study: Vaccines Cause Children More Adverse Reactions Than Any Other Drug


Story at-a-glance

  • Groundbreaking new study identifies vaccines as the most common source of adverse drug reactions in children, including anaphylaxis and death
  • Study reveals adverse drug reactions are more common for boys than girls, and infants are the most susceptible age group
  • Vaccines provide only artificial, temporary, typically inferior immunity compared to what your body receives from natural exposure to a disease
  • History offers little evidence that vaccines are responsible for eradicating disease even when “herd immunity” vaccination levels have been reached
  • After vaccines are introduced, new and more virulent strains tend to emerge, suggesting the entire vaccine-immunity paradigm is fatally flawed

By Dr. Mercola

A groundbreaking new drug safety study in Shanghai, China, provides some much needed information about the frequency of vaccine drug reactions among children.

Adverse drug reactions are a serious public health concern and one of the leading causes of morbidity and mortality worldwide.1 More than a half million children are treated every year for adverse drug reactions in US outpatient clinics and emergency rooms.2

The Shanghai study, based on reported pediatric adverse drug reactions (ADRs) for 2009, found that 42 percent were caused by vaccines, with reactions ranging from mild skin rashes to deadly reactions like anaphylaxis and death. Of all the drugs causing adverse reactions among children, vaccines are the most commonly reported.3, 4

This study is particularly significant because the vast majority of reports came from physicians, pharmacists, and other health care providers. Less than three percent of the reports were from consumers.

Another safety report5 about pediatric drug reactions was just published by the Institute for Safe Medication Practices (ISMP) and lists the top 15 drugs causing serious adverse reactions in children.

Psychiatric drugs and analgesics (especially ibuprofen) figure prominently in their top 15 list. The report also mentions psychological side effects such as aggression and suicidal ideation as frequent symptoms from 10 of the 15 most commonly reported drugs.

Drugs and Vaccines Are More Dangerous for the Very Young

Three major trends emerged in the Chinese drug reaction study:

  • Gender: Males (60 percent) were represented more than females (40 percent)
  • Age: Young children were more susceptible to harm; 65 percent of the adverse drug reactions were reported for children age 5 and under, and about 40 percent involved children aged 2 months to 2 years. The highest proportion of serious reports was for newborns (0 to 1 month). The ISMP and other researchers have confirmed that the number of adverse drug reactions is highest in the first year of life—so parents of newborns, beware!6
  • Polypharmacy“: The more drugs a child is exposed to, the higher the proportion of serious reactions; drug-to-drug interactions (DDI) are increasingly problematic with today’s practice of “polypharmacy”(using two or more drugs together)

Vaccine reactions are very difficult to detect because often, multiple vaccines are given together, with synergistic toxicities and multiple adverse interactions occurring, which makes it hard to know what is causing what. Vaccine reactions are also notoriously underreported, as many physicians brush off symptoms as mere “coincidence,” denying they have anything to do with vaccination.

The Chinese researchers made the following statement about why they believe vaccines are causing so many adverse reactions:

“The ADR rate caused by vaccines is much higher than other drugs, and this may be related to the types and number of vaccinations being used in China, as the types of routine immunization vaccines in China reach up to 15 kinds, which is much higher than seven kinds in India and Vietnam, nine kinds in Thailand and 11 kinds in America, and most of the vaccines in China are attenuated live vaccines, which may bring a greater potential safety hazard.”

High Infant Mortality and High Infant Vaccine Rates—Are They Related?

The US has one of the highest infant mortality rates in the developed world. Yet, American infants are given the greatest number of vaccines—26 doses of vaccines by the end of their first year. Can this really be a coincidence? If vaccines were doing a good job at safeguarding children’s health, the US should be enjoying extremely low infant mortality, shouldn’t it?

Acute adverse reactions that are actually reported are just the tip of the iceberg. There are many more deleterious effects when you consider post-vaccination brain inflammation (encephalitis) and encephalopathy, immune dysfunction, paralysis, and other long-term health sequelae that have been causally related to both live attenuated virus and inactivated vaccines around the world, especially the types used in developing nations. The tragic results of this are poignantly illustrated in the featured study.

If your child’s immune system is not functioning properly, he or she may be more susceptible than the average child to suffering a serious vaccine reaction. The unfortunate part is, currently there are few ways to determine in advance whether or not your child has normal immune function or has other biological, genetic, or environmental risk factors that greatly increase individual susceptibility to suffering harm from vaccinations.

This means that an adverse vaccine reaction may be your first indication your child’s immune system is vulnerable to atypical manipulation by vaccines —and sadly, in some cases, the brain or immune system damage caused by vaccination is severe and permanent. According to Dr. Kelly Brogan, one of the most fundamental problems with today’s vaccine paradigm is that vaccine safety has not been studied—much less proven: “The current schedule has never been studied – not one vaccine in a vaccinated vs. unvaccinated design, let alone multiple delivered at once, or the entire long-term effects of 49 doses of 14 vaccines by age 6.”

The Government Gives Vaccine Manufacturers a Free Pass

In 1988, Congress passed a law shielding physicians and vaccine manufacturers from vaccine injury lawsuits. Prior to this law, most doctors were much more cautious about giving vaccines to children who had a prior adverse vaccine reaction—for fear of being sued.

For example, the whole cell pertussis vaccine in the DPT shot was notorious for causing seizures, high pitched screaming, and collapse shock due to brain inflammation. Prior to 1988, pediatricians were warned not to give the DPT to children who had a history of seizures in the first 72 hours following a DPT. But now that doctors and vaccine manufacturers are protected from lawsuits, vaccine reactions are regarded as “less significant,” even “coincidental”… of course, they’re NOT insignificant when it’s your child who is having one! The vaccine manufacturers and physicians are being taken care of… but who is protecting your child?

A Fundamentally Flawed Concept of Immunity

Vaccine manufacturers would like you to believe that the “immunity” you receive from vaccines is equal to or better than what is conferred through natural exposure to the infection, but this simply isn’t the case. There are important differences between naturally acquired immunity and temporary vaccine-induced antibody production. Vaccines are never 100 percent protective because they provide only artificial, temporary, typically inferior immunity compared to what your body would receive from natural exposure to a disease.

Immunity is a complicated process with many moving parts—immunological, neurological, and endocrinological—not the dumbed down version the pharmaceutical industry feeds to the public. The common reductionist notion that immunity involves nothing more than a simple antigen-antibody response is a gross oversimplification—not to mention the arrogance that, with a vaccine, they can improve on a biological process that Nature has been perfecting for thousands or even millions of years. Take measles, for example. According to Dr. Suzanne Humphries:7

“Since most vaccines are delivered by injection, the mucous membranes are bypassed and thus blood antibodies are produced but not mucosal antibodies. Mucosal exposure is what contributes to the production of antibodies in the mammary gland. A child’s exposure to the virus while being breastfed by a naturally immune mother would lead to an asymptomatic infection that results in long-term immunity to that virus. Vaccinated mothers have lower levels of virus-specific antibodies in the serum and milk, compared to naturally immune mothers, and thus their infants are unprotected.”

Prior to the vaccine era, mothers were naturally immune to measles and passed on that immunity to their infants via placenta and breast milk. But vaccinated mothers cannot pass along vaccine-induced “immunity” because of the issue described above. As a result, infants whose mothers were born after 1963 are more susceptible to measles than are infants of older mothers. For a healthy child with normal immune function, measles is not a deadly disease—in fact, 30 percent of measles cases among the unvaccinated are missed because they are so mild.8

It should also be noted that the recently reported pertussis (whooping cough)9 and mumps outbreaks10 have occurred predominantly among the vaccinated –and measles “outbreaks”11 have also involved vaccinated persons —invalidating claims that vaccinated people cannot get sick from or transmit infectious diseases. The fact that a lot of vaccinated people still get sick is a prime example of how getting vaccinated is not a “good health” guarantee. In fact, keeping your immune system healthy through good nutrition, exercise, reduction of stress, and limiting exposure to environmental toxins is a much better strategy for staying well and also for helping you to heal more quickly if you do get sick.

The Truth About Herd Immunity

Download Interview Transcript

One of the most commonly parroted sound bites in the vaccine debate is the term “herd immunity,” tossed around by vaccine advocates who don’t really understand the concept. They suggest that if 95 percent or more of the population can be made “immune” to an infectious disease via vaccination, the disease will be eradicated or controlled. Despite these claims, there is little proof that vaccines are responsible for eradicating diseases even when “herd immunity” vaccination levels are reached. Recent outbreaks of common diseases like measles are evidence of this.

Overvaccination not only exposes people to potentially dangerous adverse reactions, but it may damage the health of the greater community. Take varicella zoster (chickenpox), for example. According to Dr. Humphries:12

“Prior to the universal varicella vaccination program, 95 percent of adults experienced natural chickenpox (usually as school aged children)—these cases were usually benign and resulted in long term immunity. This high percentage of individuals having long term immunity has been compromised by mass vaccination of children, which provides at best 70 to 90 percent immunity that is temporary and of unknown duration—shifting chickenpox to a more vulnerable adult population where chickenpox carries 20 times more risk of death and 15 times more risk of hospitalization compared to children. Add to this the adverse effects of both the chickenpox and shingles vaccines, as well as the potential for increased risk of shingles for an estimated 30 to 50 years among adults.”

A young child with active chickenpox, who comes into contact with an adult who had chickenpox as a child, is giving the adult a natural “booster” that will not cause symptoms but will strengthen the adult’s immunity to the disease. But since the introduction of the chickenpox vaccine in 1995 in the US, followed by chickenpox vaccine mandates in the states, there are fewer natural boosters for the adult population. Now, there is a shingles (herpes zoster) epidemic among adults – and Merck is the sole producer of both chickenpox and shingles vaccine in the US!

Vaccines Invite New Strains to the Party

Vaccines are having the unintended effect of creating new strains and more virulent strains of disease, in a similar way as antibiotic overuse has led to antibiotic resistance. The B. pertussis organism that causes whooping cough has evolved to evade the DPT/DtaP vaccines that have been used worldwide since the early 1950s. A mutated B. pertussis strain has emerged and is associated with severe symptoms.13

Sometimes, the pressure placed by vaccines on an organism causes non-vaccine strains to become more dominant. This is true of some of the more than 80 pneumococcal strains that are not contained in pneumococcal vaccines (Prevnar-7 and Prevnar-13), and have become prevalent since the vaccines were introduced in 2000.14 Some of these non-vaccine strains are now causing severe disease. This phenomenon is a direct result of the pressure on the organisms to adapt and survive.

The point is, even if vaccines were somehow miraculously able to eradicate all of our most dreaded infectious diseases, it’s only a matter of time before new versions will appear—and potentially with heightened virulence! Life has a way of finding a means to survive. And you will be less prepared to fight off these new invaders if your immune system is compromised, as it can be from vaccines. With that in mind, vaccination may very well be promoting infectious disease, rather than eliminating it.15

If you are thinking there MUST be a better way to stay healthy than continuously adding new vaccines, you are right! There is no complicated recipe, no extensive protocols… just good basic lifestyle choices. Eat well, sleep well, exercise effectively and consistently, manage your stress, and avoid toxic exposures whenever possible. Making a few lifestyle adjustments will allow you to build your health naturally, including your resistance to illness. And of course, we can all benefit from the support and care of a good physician!

Finding an Enlightened Physician

If you are a parent, it’s up to you to find a doctor you can trust who will avoid administering vaccines in the face of previous vaccine reactions. Don’t be afraid to stand up for your right to protect your child. There are enlightened pediatricians who take a “precautionary approach” because they care about preventing adverse reactions, injuries, and deaths. It’s your health, your family, your choice.

Search until you find a compassionate and knowledgeable health care practitioner who will work with you to make the best decisions for you and your family. If you are the parent of a newborn, be extremely careful with all drugs and use them ONLY if absolutely necessary. As you have seen, infants are the most vulnerable. If you or your child experiences an adverse reaction to a drug or vaccine, please consult your physician immediately and report it to VAERS, the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System, and encourage your physician to do the same.

Protect Your Right to Informed Consent and Defend Vaccine Exemptions

 

With all the uncertainty surrounding the safety and efficacy of vaccines, it’s critical to protect your right to make independent health choices and exercise voluntary informed consent to vaccination. It is urgent that everyone in America stand up and fight to protect and expand vaccine informed consent protections in state public health and employment laws. The best way to do this is to get personally involved with your state legislators and educating the leaders in your community.

THINK GLOBALLY, ACT LOCALLY.

National vaccine policy recommendations are made at the federal level but vaccine laws are made at the state level. It is at the state level where your action to protect your vaccine choice rights can have the greatest impact. It is critical for EVERYONE to get involved now in standing up for the legal right to make voluntary vaccine choices in America because those choices are being threatened by lobbyists representing drug companies, medical trade associations and public health officials, who are trying to persuade legislators to strip all vaccine exemptions from public health laws.

Signing up for NVIC’s free Advocacy Portal at www.NVICAdvocacy.org gives you immediate, easy access to your own state legislators on your Smart Phone or computer so you can make your voice heard. You will be kept up-to-date on the latest state bills threatening your vaccine choice rights and get practical, useful information to help you become an effective vaccine choice advocate in your own community. Also, when national vaccine issues come up, you will have the up-to-date information and call to action items you need at your fingertips..

So please, as your first step, sign up for the NVIC Advocacy Portal.

Share Your Story with the Media and People You Know

If you or a family member has suffered a serious vaccine reaction, injury or death, please talk about it. If we don’t share information and experiences with each other, everybody feels alone and afraid to speak up. Write a letter to the editor if you have a different perspective on a vaccine story that appears in your local newspaper. Make a call in to a radio talk show that is only presenting one side of the vaccine story.

I must be frank with you; you have to be brave because you might be strongly criticized for daring to talk about the “other side” of the vaccine story. Be prepared for it and have the courage to not back down. Only by sharing our perspective and what we know to be true about vaccination will the public conversation about vaccination open up so people are not afraid to talk about it.

We cannot allow the drug companies and medical trade associations funded by drug companies or public health officials promoting forced use of a growing list of vaccines to dominate the conversation about vaccination. The vaccine injured cannot be swept under the carpet and treated like nothing more than “statistically acceptable collateral damage” of national one-size-fits-all mandatory vaccination policies that put way too many people at risk for injury and death. We shouldn’t be treating people like guinea pigs instead of human beings.

Internet Resources Where You Can Learn More

I encourage you to visit the website of the non-profit charity, the National Vaccine Information Center (NVIC), at www.NVIC.org:

  • NVIC Memorial for Vaccine Victims: View descriptions and photos of children and adults, who have suffered vaccine reactions, injuries and deaths. If you or your child experiences an adverse vaccine event, please consider posting and sharing your story here.
  • If You Vaccinate, Ask 8 Questions: Learn how to recognize vaccine reaction symptoms and prevent vaccine injuries.
  • Vaccine Freedom Wall: View or post descriptions of harassment and sanctions by doctors, employers, school and health officials for making independent vaccine choices.

Connect with Your Doctor or Find a New One that Will Listen and Care

If your pediatrician or doctor refuses to provide medical care to you or your child unless you agree to get vaccines you don’t want, I strongly encourage you to have the courage to find another doctor. Harassment, intimidation, and refusal of medical care is becoming the modus operandi of the medical establishment in an effort to stop the change in attitude of many parents about vaccinations after they become truly educated about health and vaccination.

However, there is hope.

At least 15 percent of young doctors recently polled admit that they’re starting to adopt a more individualized approach to vaccinations in direct response to the vaccine safety concerns of parents. It is good news that there is a growing number of smart young doctors, who prefer to work as partners with parents in making personalized vaccine decisions for children, including delaying vaccinations or giving children fewer vaccines on the same day or continuing to provide medical care for those families, who decline use of one or more vaccines.

So take the time to locate a doctor, who treats you with compassion and respect and is willing to work with you to do what is right for your child.

 

[-] Sources and References

The Gardasil vaccine


Gardasil and the Public Flogging of Katie Couric

Story at-a-glance

  • After giving airtime to two mothers whose daughters’ health suddenly deteriorated after Gardasil shots, a smear campaign against seasoned journalist Katie Couric was unleashed
  • $3 billion in federal compensation has been awarded to vaccine victims in the US for injuries stemming from the Gardasil vaccine
  • By December 13, 2013, Gardasil had generated nearly 30,000 adverse reaction reports to the US government, including 140 deaths
  • Such adverse reaction reports are only a fraction of the numbers of Gardasil reactions, injuries, and deaths that have actually occurred, as most doctors either do not report it, or make reports directly to Merck
  • By 2006, pap tests had driven down the numbers of new cases of cervical cancer to 9,700 per year with about 3,700 deaths—hardly the kind of death toll that would warrant injecting every single woman in the country against HPV

By Barbara Loe Fisher

The public flogging of veteran broadcast journalist Katie Couric began on December 4, 2013, immediately after a 17-minute report on HPV and Gardasil vaccine was broadcast on her TV talk show “Katie.”1 It was kick-started by a west coast business writer, who administered the first lash with a bizarre take-down of freedom of the press:

“The real punch of the show was its portrayal of HPV vaccination as ‘controversial,'” he charged. “Merely to ask questions is to validate them.”

He ended with a sucker punch:

“Katie Couric established her credibility as a spokeswoman for preventive medicine more than a decade ago… now she’ll be known for promoting junk medicine instead.”2

‘Is Katie Couric the Next Jenny McCarthy?’

Then, like piranhas in a fish tank full of fresh chum, an online clique of mean girls and bully boys let Katie have it right between the eyes.

“Is Katie Couric the next Jenny McCarthy?” sneered a headline for an article in which a cub reporter sharpened her claws on Couric’s credibility by hissing, “The damage a former Playboy Bunny has been able to do is bad enough. But Couric’s misdeeds are all the worse given that she’s taken much more seriously than Jenny McCarthy.”3

Continuing with that lame theme, an entertainment writer stuck it to Katie when she suggested that:

“To some, Couric’s behavior is even more problematic than McCarthy’s, given her stature as a respected journalist and former network news anchor, as well as her previous efforts to educate the public about the fight against cancer.”4

One headline screamed “Katie Couric Hands Over Her Show to Anti-Vaccine Alarmists”5 and another one gasped “Why Is Katie Couric Promoting Vaccine Skeptics?” followed by an article written by a photojournalist sniping that “Couric needs to review her priorities.”6

Katie Couric: Presenting HPV Information and Perspective

Katie’s unforgiveable transgression? On her afternoon talk show, she gave two mothers, who had witnessed their daughters’ health suddenly deteriorate after Gardasil shots, an opportunity to speak about what happened.7, 8

She gave an international HPV infection expert,9 who participated in Gardasil vaccine clinical trial research, an opportunity to comment about the effectiveness of Gardasil vaccine and the need for all girls – whether they get vaccinated or not – to get regular pap screening.10

She gave a pediatrician an opportunity to encourage parents to vaccinate their 11-year-old boys and girls because “HPV vaccine does not seem to be any risker than any of the other vaccines we routinely use;”11, 12 and Katie gave a mother and her daughter an opportunity to enthusiastically endorse the vaccine.13

Katie Couric presented information and a range of perspectives about a current topic being discussed by millions of parents and young women in homes and doctors’ offices across the country. She did it because she is an intellectually honest journalist, a compassionate mother, and a cancer prevention pioneer.

Fourteen years ago, Katie Couric almost singlehandedly put a human face on the importance of colonoscopy screening, especially for those at high risk when she publicly witnessed about the tragedy of losing her husband and the father of her children to colon cancer.14 After a long and successful career in broadcast journalism, in 2006 she became the first woman to anchor the evening news on a major US TV network.15

An Orchestrated Campaign of Intimidation

The shaming of Katie Couric for caring and daring to ask questions about Gardasil vaccine was a well-orchestrated campaign of intimidation. It was a warning delivered to all journalists that – no matter who you are – your characterwill be assassinated if you step out of line and question the safety or effectiveness of a government recommended vaccine.

The cyber lynch mob16-22 presenting opinion as unassailable fact delighted in quoting each other and did not reserve their vitriol for Katie. Two mothers on the show were ridiculed for describing their daughters’ Gardasil vaccine reaction symptoms, which are similar to those reported by many, many others in the US and around the world.23-43

The credentialed Gardasil vaccine researcher44 on the show was attacked for stating that regular pap tests are the most reliable way of detecting and preventing cervical cancer regardless of vaccination, a position held by cancer prevention experts.45-47

Katie Couric Encourages Informed Vaccine Decision Making

Two days after the public flogging began, Katie interviewed the Assistant Surgeon General48 before authoring an article for The Huffington Post responding to the firestorm with unapologetic professionalism.49 She acknowledged her report could have spent more time putting the statistical risk of suffering a vaccine reaction into greater perspective but she defended the inclusion of mothers reporting Gardasil reactions:

“Some people say their children have suffered from a variety of medical problems after the HPV vaccination, and there have even been a few reports of death,” she said. “As a journalist, I felt that we couldn’t simply ignore these reports.”

Katie reinforced a call for regular pap screening:

“There’s been troubling research out of Australia that indicates some women are skipping their Pap tests because they have been vaccinated. That’s a terrible idea.

While the vaccine protects against some of the HPV strains that cause cervical cancers, it doesn’t protect against all of them and regular Pap smears are essential for life-saving diagnoses,” she said.

Katie concluded her statement by encouraging critical thinking and informed vaccine decision-making:

“I had my own two daughters vaccinated against HPV. I hope that other parents will look at the research and the facts, and make a reasoned decision on the HPV vaccine and what is best for their children,” she said.

‘Not Enough,’ He Says

However, Katie’s clarification prompted one bully to bring out the whip one more time. Under a headline complaining that “Katie Couric Backs Off from Her Anti-Vaccine Show But Not Enough,” he snarled:

“The video depictions of mothers and daughters in tears will stay with thousands of Couric’s loyal viewers. Her written mea culpa, not so much.”50

Perhaps he wanted her to walk across cut glass on her knees and whimper a little on camera so he could be convinced that she would be a good girl from now on and never, ever step out of line again.

Mothers Will Not Stop Witnessing

One thing is as clear today as it was 32 years ago when mothers publicly witnessed how they watched their children suffer brain inflammation or die after being injected with the old, crude, and toxic DPT vaccine.51-64 Clearly, when mothers stand up in the public square today and describe how Gardasil vaccine risks for their daughters turned out to be 100 percent, deniers of vaccine risks get really, really emotional. They get angry and defensive. They gather together in a pack, take out the rope, and start cyber-lynching.

Mothers around the world, who give birth to babies they are responsible for nurturing through infancy and childhood, are not going to stop talking about what happened to their children after vaccination. Mothers are not going to shut up and sit down like good little girls after they witness the bodies and brains of the children they love be destroyed when Gardasil shots go wrong.

Mothers Will Not Stop Thinking Critically

They are not going to stop reading the medical literature and thinking critically about the science65-71 used to justify giving every child the most expensive federally recommended pediatric vaccine on the US market72 to prevent an infection that is cleared bymore than 90 percent of people without a problem:73,74

  • A vaccine developed by NIH researchers75 using GMO technology that was sold by NIH to Merck76 and fast-tracked to licensure using questionable surrogate markers for efficacy77, 78
  • A vaccine for a sexually transmitted disease that was tested in fewer than 1,200 children under the age of 1679 using a bioactive aluminum “placebo” as a bogus control in clinical trials80-84
  • A vaccine that was only tested in 1,000 adolescent girls and boys in combination with the federally recommended Tdap and meningococcal vaccines85
  • A vaccine given by pediatricians shielded from legal accountability for vaccine injuries and deaths, just like vaccine manufacturers are shielded from civil liability in US courts86
  • A vaccine that by December 13, 2013 had generated nearly 30,000 adverse reaction reports to the US government, including 140 deaths87 – which is only a fraction of the numbers of Gardasil reactions, injuries, and deaths that have actually occurred because most doctors either do not report to the government or make reports directly to Merck.88-90

Federal Awards, Lawsuits, Gardasil Recommendation Withdrawal

Yes, it is illogical to assume that every single one of the reported Gardasil reaction reports and deaths are caused by the vaccine, but it is just as illogical to assume that none of them are caused by the vaccine. But logic has nothing to do with one-size-fits-all vaccine policies that sacrifice individuals, who are biologically or environmentally at high risk for suffering vaccine harm,91 while no research is being done to identify who they are to spare their lives.

Informed mothers know that among the $3 billion in federal compensation that has been awarded to vaccine victims in the US are awards for Gardasil vaccine injuries.92 They know Gardasil vaccine injured girls are suing vaccine manufacturers in France, where citizens can still file product liability lawsuits.93 They know that public health officials in Japan no longer recommend Gardasil vaccine because Japan’s government is not writing off every death and case of brain inflammation and autoimmunity following Gardasil shots as just a “coincidence.”94

HPV Vaccination Made a Top Public Health Priority in US

In what may or may not be a coincidence, at the end of December, the Centers for Disease Control made HPV vaccination one of the top five “public health priorities” for 2014. In one media article,95 the HPV vaccination rate of 30 percent in the US was compared to the 85 percent vaccination rate in Rwanda, an impoverished, war-torn country where women have been dying in great numbers from cervical cancer because there has been no routine pap screening available to them. In 2011, Merck created a school-based vaccination program for all sixth graders in Rwanda to be injected with three doses of Gardasil vaccine.96

But the United States is not Rwanda. In America, cervical cancer has declined more than 70 percent after pap screening became a routine part of women’s health care in the 1960s and, by 2006, pap tests had driven down the numbers of new cases of cervical cancer to 9,700 per year with about 3,700 deaths97 in a US population of more than 300 million people. In the US, the 14,000 annual deaths from six cancers associated with HPV98-104 represent less than three percent of the more than 550,000 cancer deaths that occur every year.

Many Other Public Health Emergencies in US Deserve Priority Status

There are many public health emergencies in our country that cause far more deaths and disabilities but do not receive a fair share of the hundreds of billions of dollars appropriated by Congress to health agencies every year.105 For example:

  • Between 210,000 and 440,000 hospitalized patients each year suffer some type of preventable harm that contributes to their death106
  • The US has the worst infant mortality107 and maternal mortality108,109 rates of all developed nations, with 28,000 babies dying before their first birthday110
  • Millions of children are becoming disabled or dying in the unexplained chronic illness epidemic111 that costs trillions of dollars to treat: one child in six in America is learning disabled;112 one in nine suffers from asthma;113 one in 10 has ADHD;114 1 in 50 develops autism115 and 1 in 450 becomes diabetic.116
  • Millions more are suffering from mental health problems. One adolescent in five in the US experiences significant symptoms of emotional distress, and one in 10 is emotionally impaired.117

Bigger Market for Merck and HPV Vaccine Mandates?

Perhaps the CDC is simply boosting the congressionally approved, lucrative public-private partnership with Big Pharma118-124 by securing a bigger market for Merck’s new 9-strain version of Gardasil scheduled to be licensed in the fall of 2014.125 Or perhaps the Merck-Government-Medical Trade lobby is planning another multi-state roll-out of HPV vaccine mandates for all sixth grade children in the US just like they did in 2007.126-128

Roll Up Your Sleeve – No Questions Asked

Whatever the reasons that government officials made HPV vaccination a top public health priority in the US, the cyber-lynching of Katie Couric and mothers reporting Gardasil vaccine reactions is a warning to parents everywhere. Do not forget that the cruel, dogmatic position of vaccine risk denialism is: roll up your sleeve – no questions asked – and “may the odds be ever in your favor.”129, 130

Protect Your Right to Informed Consent and Defend Vaccine Exemptions

 

With all the uncertainty surrounding the safety and efficacy of vaccines, it’s critical to protect your right to make independent health choices and exercise voluntary informed consent to vaccination. It is urgent that everyone in America stand up and fight to protect and expand vaccine informed consent protections in state public health and employment laws. The best way to do this is to get personally involved with your state legislators and educating the leaders in your community.

THINK GLOBALLY, ACT LOCALLY.

National vaccine policy recommendations are made at the federal level but vaccine laws are made at the state level. It is at the state level where your action to protect your vaccine choice rights can have the greatest impact. It is critical for EVERYONE to get involved now in standing up for the legal right to make voluntary vaccine choices in America because those choices are being threatened by lobbyists representing drug companies, medical trade associations and public health officials, who are trying to persuade legislators to strip all vaccine exemptions from public health laws.

Signing up for NVIC’s free Advocacy Portal at www.NVICAdvocacy.org gives you immediate, easy access to your own state legislators on your Smart Phone or computer so you can make your voice heard. You will be kept up-to-date on the latest state bills threatening your vaccine choice rights and get practical, useful information to help you become an effective vaccine choice advocate in your own community. Also, when national vaccine issues come up, you will have the up-to-date information and call to action items you need at your fingertips..

So please, as your first step, sign up for the NVIC Advocacy Portal.

Share Your Story with the Media and People You Know

If you or a family member has suffered a serious vaccine reaction, injury or death, please talk about it. If we don’t share information and experiences with each other, everybody feels alone and afraid to speak up. Write a letter to the editor if you have a different perspective on a vaccine story that appears in your local newspaper. Make a call in to a radio talk show that is only presenting one side of the vaccine story.

I must be frank with you; you have to be brave because you might be strongly criticized for daring to talk about the “other side” of the vaccine story. Be prepared for it and have the courage to not back down. Only by sharing our perspective and what we know to be true about vaccination will the public conversation about vaccination open up so people are not afraid to talk about it.

We cannot allow the drug companies and medical trade associations funded by drug companies or public health officials promoting forced use of a growing list of vaccines to dominate the conversation about vaccination. The vaccine injured cannot be swept under the carpet and treated like nothing more than “statistically acceptable collateral damage” of national one-size-fits-all mandatory vaccination policies that put way too many people at risk for injury and death. We shouldn’t be treating people like guinea pigs instead of human beings.

Internet Resources Where You Can Learn More

I encourage you to visit the website of the non-profit charity, the National Vaccine Information Center (NVIC), at www.NVIC.org:

  • NVIC Memorial for Vaccine Victims: View descriptions and photos of children and adults, who have suffered vaccine reactions, injuries and deaths. If you or your child experiences an adverse vaccine event, please consider posting and sharing your story here.
  • If You Vaccinate, Ask 8 Questions: Learn how to recognize vaccine reaction symptoms and prevent vaccine injuries.
  • Vaccine Freedom Wall: View or post descriptions of harassment and sanctions by doctors, employers, school and health officials for making independent vaccine choices.

Connect with Your Doctor or Find a New One that Will Listen and Care

If your pediatrician or doctor refuses to provide medical care to you or your child unless you agree to get vaccines you don’t want, I strongly encourage you to have the courage to find another doctor. Harassment, intimidation, and refusal of medical care is becoming the modus operandi of the medical establishment in an effort to stop the change in attitude of many parents about vaccinations after they become truly educated about health and vaccination.

However, there is hope.

At least 15 percent of young doctors recently polled admit that they’re starting to adopt a more individualized approach to vaccinations in direct response to the vaccine safety concerns of parents. It is good news that there is a growing number of smart young doctors, who prefer to work as partners with parents in making personalized vaccine decisions for children, including delaying vaccinations or giving children fewer vaccines on the same day or continuing to provide medical care for those families, who decline use of one or more vaccines.

So take the time to locate a doctor, who treats you with compassion and respect and is willing to work with you to do what is right for your child.

 

References:

1.
BC-TV. The HPV Vaccine Conversation. Katie Dec. 4, 2013.
2.
Hiltzik, M. Katie Couric Puts the Anti-Vaccination Movement Into the
Mainstream. LA Times Dec. 4, 2013. Michael Hiltzik Bio.
3.
Sifferlin A. Is Katie Couric the Next Jenny McCarthy? Time Magazine Dec. 4,
2013. Alexandra Sifferlin Bio.
4.
Blake, M. Katie Couric Under Fire for Allegedly Slanted Report on HPV
Vaccine. LA Times Dec. 5, 2012. Meredith Blake Bio.
5.
Marcotte A. Katie Hands Over Her Show to Anti-Vaccine Alarmists. Slate
Dec. 4, 2013. Amanda Marcotte Bio.
6.
Haelle T. Why Is Katie Couric Promoting Vaccine Skeptics? Politico Dec. 9,
2013. Tara Haelle Bio.
7.
Was the HPV Vaccine Responsible for One Girl’s Death? Katie Dec. 4, 2013.
8.
Is the HPV Vaccine Safe? Katie Dec. 4, 2013.
9.
University of Louisville. Missouri Professor Named Family, Geriatric Medicine
Chair at University of Louisville. Press Release: Aug. 26, 2013.
10.
See References #7, 8, 11.
11.
Klein NP, Hansen J et al. Safety of Quadrivalent Human Papillomavirus
Vaccine Administered Routinely to Females. JAMA Pediatrics 2012; 166(12):
1140-1148.
12.
Arnheim-Dahlstrom L, Pasternak B et al. Autoimmune, neurologic, and
venous thromboembolic adverse events after immunization of adolescent girls
with quadrivalent human papillomavirus vaccine in Denmark and Sweden:
cohort study. BMJ 2013; 347.
13.
Should Your Son or Daughter Get the HPV Vaccine? Katie Dec. 4, 2013.
14.
NIH. A Conversation with Katie Couric. NIH Medline Plus Spring 2009.
15.
Biography.com. Katie Couric.
16.
Monookin S. Katie Couric Promotes Dangerous Fear Mongering with Show
on the HPV Vaccine. PLOS Blogs Dec. 3, 2013. Seth Mnookin Bio.
17.
Herper M. Four Ways Katie Couric Stacked the Deck Against Gardasil.
Forbes Dec. 4, 2013. Matthew Herper Bio.
18.
Willingham E. Katie Couric Promotes Anticancer Vaccine Alarmism. Forbes
Dec. 4, 2013. Emily Willingham Bio.
19.
McDonough K. Katie Couric Gets Called Out for Promoting Bogus Science on
HPV Vaccine.Salon.com Dec. 4, 2013. Kate McDonough Bio.
20.
Specter M. “The shameful @katiecouric HPV vaccine show was a model of
dangerously misinformed reporting. Katie, your credibility is gone.” Twitter
Dec. 5, 2013. Michael Specter BIO.
21.
See References #2, 3, 4, 5, 6.
22.
Klimas L. Katie Couric Slammed for HPV Vaccine Alarmism. The Blaze Dec.
5, 2013. Liz Klimas Bio.
23.
NVIC.org. HPV: Testimonials About Gardasil Vaccine Reactions.
24.
Debold V, Downey C, Fisher BL. Human Papilloma Virus Safety: Analysis of
Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System Reports: Part III. NVIC Aug. 14,
2007. 25.
Yamada N. Gardasil Vaccine Concerns. WUSA-TV 2008.
26.
Edelman S. Fed’s Warning Shot. New York Post July 6, 2008
27.
Edelman S. My Girl Died as a ‘Guinea Pig” for Gardasil. New York Post July
20, 2008.
28.
Rouse R. Report Links HPV Vaccine with Pancreatitis Case. Medical
Observer Aug. 8, 2008.
29.
Sutton I, Lahoria R et al. CNS Demyelination and Quadrivalent Vaccination.
Mult Scler 2009; 15: 116-119.
30.
Attkisson S. Gardasil Vaccine Draws Concern. CBS Evening News Feb. 7,
2009.
31.
Fisher BL, Debold V. An Analysis by the National Vaccine Information Center
(NVIC) of Gardasil and Menactra Adverse Event Reports to the Vaccine
Adverse Events Reporting System (VAERS).NVIC Feb. 7, 2009.
32.
NVIC. Investigate Gardasil Vaccine Risks Now! The Petition Site Launchedon
Feb. 9, 2009.
33.
Slade BA, Leidel R et al. Postlicensure Safety Surveillance for Quadrivalent
Human Papillomavirus Recombinant Vaccine JAMA 2009; 302(7): 750-757.
34.
Orbach H. Vaccines and Autoimmune Diseases of the Adult. Discovery
Medicine Feb. 4, 2010.
35.
Xinhuanet. HPV vaccine comes under spotlight in Korea. Xinhuanet June 8,
2010.
36.
Green G. Gardasil: Krystal’s Story. Women Hurt by Medicine May 14, 2010.
37.
SaneVax, Inc. HPV Vaccine Victims.
38.
Alvarex-Sonia MJ, Hernandez-Gonzalez A et al. Demyelinating Disease and
Vaccination of the Human Papillomavirus. Rev Neurol 2011; 52(8): 472-476.
39.
Souayah N, Michas-Martin PA. Guillain Barre syndrome after Gardasil
vaccination: data from Vaccine Adverse Events Reporting System 2006-2009.
Vaccine 2011; 29(5) 886-889.
40.
Soldevilla HF, Brones SFR, Navarra SV. Systemic lupus erythematosus
following HPV immunization. Lupus 2012; 21: 158-161.
41.
Gonthier V. Family Sues After Teen Dies Following HPV Vaccination. Toronto
Sun Jan. 31, 2012.
42.
Colafranceso S Perricone C et al. Human Papilloma Virus Vaccine and
Primary Ovarian Failure: Another Facet of Autoimmune/Inflammatory
Syndrome Induced by Adjuvants. American Journal of Reproductive
Immunology 2013.
43.
Baklinski T. Japan Withdraws Support of Controversial HPV Vaccine Over
Safety Concerns. Lifesite News Oct. 16, 2013
44.
WMKC School of Medicine. Diane M. Harper, MD, MPH, MS. Also see
Reference #9.
45.
NIH. Pap Tests and Cervical Health: A Healthy Habit for You. National
Cancer Institute Oct. 2, 2012 and Cervical Cancer Screening.
46.
American Cancer Society. Can Cervical Cancer Be Prevented? April 11,
2013.
47.
CDC. Cervical Cancer Screening. Sept. 5, 2013.
48.
HPV Vaccine Conversation Continued. Katie Dec. 6, 2013.

 

17 Children Die After Receiving Hepatitis B Vaccine


Story at-a-glance

  • Over a period of two months, eight infants in China died within hours, and in some cases minutes, of receiving hepatitis B vaccines
  • Nine other deaths among Chinese children aged 5 and younger were also recently reported following hepatitis B vaccination
  • Six of the deaths occurred in infants who had received the vaccine made by Shenzhen Kangtai Biological Products, while two occurred after hepatitis B vaccine produced by drug maker Beijing Tiantan Biological Products
  • Health authorities in China have since launched an investigation and have suspended the use of millions of doses of hepatitis B vaccine made by Shenzhen Kangtai
  • Serious questions regarding effectiveness, low transmission rates among babies and the steep risk of side effects make the hepatitis B vaccine’s use very hard to justify for healthy newborns
  • By Dr. Mercola

    If you’re a parent-to-be or are planning to have children in the future, one of the first decisions you’ll need to make is whether or not to give your child the hepatitis B vaccine.

    Even if you consider yourself to be in favor of vaccinations and the current US vaccine schedule, this is one vaccine that deserves special consideration. In fact, the hepatitis B vaccine for newborns and young children is the least justifiable of any vaccine I can think of…

    Hepatitis B is only transmitted via contaminated needles, blood transfusion, or contact with contaminated blood and/or body fluids. If the mother is negative, there’s very little risk of a baby contracting this disease, and the vaccine’s effectiveness is highly questionable, anyway.

    Further, serious side effects and even deaths have also been reported following receipt of this vaccine, including eight recent newborn deaths in China. Over a period of two months, eight infants in China died within hours, and in some cases minutes, of receiving hepatitis B vaccines. In all, 17 deaths among Chinese children aged 5 and younger have been reported following hepatitis B vaccines administered in late 2013.

    China Investigates Makers of Hepatitis B Vaccine After Baby Deaths

    Six of the deaths occurred in infants who had received the vaccine made by Shenzhen Kangtai Biological Products, while two occurred after hepatitis B vaccine produced by drug maker Beijing Tiantan Biological Products (shares of this company plunged by up to 10 percent following media reports of the deaths).

    Health authorities in China have since launched an investigation and have suspended the use of millions of doses of hepatitis B vaccine made by Shenzhen Kangtai. So far the drug companies have denied that their products played a role in the deaths, and Chinese health authorities have also said that nine of the 17 deaths were unrelated to the vaccine.

    According to China’s National Health and Family Planning Commission, those deaths were due to acute pneumonia, suffocation, kidney failure, severe diarrhea, death of intestinal tissue, sudden infant death, congenital heart disease and other causes.1

    As for the remaining eight deaths, Chinese authorities have also said that a preliminary investigation has found no link between the deaths and the vaccines. However, firm conclusions have yet to be reached, pending the results of autopsies to confirm the causes of death.

    Victim’s Father Speaks Out, Calls Official Report “Absolute Rubbish”

    In a report by Radio Free Asia,2 the father of one of the 17 children who died after receiving a hepatitis B vaccine called Chinese health officials’ claims that the deaths had nothing to do with the vaccine “absolute rubbish.”

    Many others commenting on social media also expressed doubts about the government’s analysis and conclusions, especially in light of a series of product safety and health scandals in recent years. Often, those who dare to speak out are persecuted or punished for questioning the status quo.

    Radio Free Asia reported:3

    China’s pharmaceutical industry is highly lucrative but poorly regulated, resulting in a string of fatalities blamed on counterfeit or shoddy medications in recent years.

    An investigative report in the China Economic Observer newspaper in 2010 said that improperly stored vaccines administered by Shanxi health officials for encephalitis, hepatitis B, and rabies between 2006 and 2008 had killed four children and sickened more than 70 others, with tainted vaccines being used as late as March 2009.

    Top investigative reporter Wang Keqin, who exposed the vaccine scandal among others, was forced out of his job at the newspaper in February 2013.

    Parents who complain about mishaps linked to health and safety issues say they are frequently themselves targeted for official harassment and punishment.

    In 2011, authorities in Beijing sentenced parent activist Yang Yukui to five months’ “re-education through labor” on charges of “provoking disputes and causing trouble” after he complained that his son had been in and out of the hospital since being given a bacille Calmette-Guerin (BCG) tuberculosis vaccination shortly after birth.”

     a Coincidence?

    Unfortunately, it’s not at all unusual for a vaccine maker to rule a child’s death shortly after vaccination as a “coincidence.” In the US, when babies die after hepatitis B vaccinations, most of the time their deaths are automatically attributed to Sudden Infant Death Syndrome (SIDS) — without investigation into whether the vaccine caused the baby’s sudden death.

    One of the most famous cases of hepatitis B vaccine was Michael Belkin’s daughter who died in his arms 15 hours after receiving the absolutely unnecessary hepatitis B vaccine. Below is his testimony to Congress in 1999.

     

    When a baby’s death is listed as “SIDS,” rarely does anyone ask about the deceased infant’s vaccination history to find out whether there were symptoms of vaccine reactions before death, even though the biomedical literature has repeatedly signaled this connection.4

    In China, the deaths occurred so close to vaccination, and in so many infants, that a potential connection could not be ignored. But even in the US, deaths following hepatitis B vaccine are far from unheard of. According to the National Vaccine Information Center (NVIC):5

    “…hepatitis B vaccine-related adverse events reported to the federal Vaccine Adverse Events Reporting System (VAERS) [include] reports of headache, irritability, extreme fatigue, brain inflammation, convulsions, rheumatoid arthritis, optic neuritis, multiple sclerosis, lupus, Guillain-Barre Syndrome (GBS) and neuropathy.

    There have been more than 1,500 hepatitis B vaccine-related deaths reported, including deaths classified as sudden infant death syndrome (SIDS).”

    Shenzhen Kangtai has posted a statement suggesting that the deaths may be related to an underlying disease, noting that “coincidental diseases… are the easiest to misinterpret.”6 But Dr. Zeng Guang, chief epidemiologist with the China Center for Disease Control and Prevention, warned against taking the drug maker’s conclusion as fact, stating:7

    “We should not treat the company’s statement like a conclusion… They may be trying to protect their self-interest. Or they may have a lot of confidence in their product.”

    Merck’s Role in Building China’s Largest Hepatitis B Vaccine Maker

    It’s interesting to note that US pharmaceutical giant Merck actually helped the Chinese build Shenzhen Kangtai in the 1990s. Merck also granted the company the biological technology to produce a hepatitis B vaccine royalty free in what the New York Times described as an “unusual joint venture aimed at improving health standards in China.”8

    The company has since become China’s biggest producer of hepatitis B vaccines, where it holds 60 percent market share. A new $140-million research and development and drug manufacturing facility is also in the works…The infant deaths come on the heels of Chinese vows to tighten up food and drug safety and crack down on violators. The country has faced a slew of scandals in recent years, yet this hasn’t stopped to US from eyeing it as a key contender for future business. As Fierce Pharma reported:9

    China is a key emerging market for Big Pharma, which sees great opportunity there. One example is French drugmaker Sanofi, whose vaccine unit Sanofi Pasteur got approval in October to begin manufacturing influenza vaccines at a new plant in Shenzhen. But China has struggled to keep up with oversight on health and food issues.

    Five years ago, tainted Chinese heparin killed dozens of dialysis patients in the U.S., which made the FDA realize it needed to keep a closer look on production there. The FDA is currently investigating Chinese-made pet treats that have killed hundreds of dogs in the U.S. To get in a better position to deal with China’s growing place in the U.S. drug supply chain, the FDA is significantly adding to its own presence in China, planning to station another 10 drug inspectors and 9 food inspectors there over the next year.”

    The ‘Worst Case of Research Fraud’ in Decades

    In related vaccine news, Dong-Pyou Han, assistant professor of biomedical sciences at Iowa State University, recently resigned after faking AIDS vaccine test results. The researcher apparently added human blood that contained HIV antibodies to rabbit blood to skew the results. The human HIV antibodies in the rabbit blood made it appear as though the experimental AIDS vaccine was working and prompting the animals to build defenses against HIV.

    Not only were the results presented at scientific meetings over a period of several years, but the findings were instrumental in helping the research team gain $19 million in federal grants ($10 million of which was awarded after the fraudulent results were reported). James Bradac, who is involved with AIDS vaccine grants for the National Institutes of Health (NIH), called the case “the worst case of research fraud” in his 24 years at NIH.10 It just goes to show you, again, that even scientific “truths” can be falsified, and even work from widely respected university researchers must be closely examined and supported before being accepted as fact…

    Serious Questions Remain About Hepatitis B Vaccine Effectiveness

    Another issue to consider if you are weighing the benefits and risks of giving your newborn infant or young child hepatitis B vaccine is that vaccine acquired immunity often does not persist until a child reaches his or her teenage years – the time when acquiring a hepatitis B infection may be more likely. Research shows that by that time, the protection from the childhood vaccine may have long since waned.11

    Further, a recent study found that hepatitis B vaccine was not effective in preventing asymptomatic occult (hidden) HBV (hepatitis B virus) infection in babies, which may occur in up to 40 percent of babies born to hepatitis-B-positive mothers.12 Except in the case of a hepatitis-B-positive mother, the medical justification for vaccinating infants against hepatitis B simply doesn’t exist. In addition, the result of this above-mentioned study even refutes the commonly held assumption that hepatitis B vaccine is effective in preventing mother-to-infant transmission of all forms of hepatitis B.

    The serious questions regarding effectiveness, coupled with the low transmission rates among babies and the steep risk of side effects, makes this vaccine’s use very hard to justify for healthy newborns.

    Is Hepatitis B Vaccine Even Effective in Newborns?

    Vaccine-derived immunity is thought to be short lived. Between 30-50% of vaccinated individuals lose their antibodies within 7 years. Up to 60% of persons who initially respond will lose detectable antibodies within 12 years. So that means that these vaccines will provide little to no protection to the real risks of acquiring hepatitis B, promiscuous sexual behavior, and IV drug abuse.

    How Many Children Are Reportedly Hurt by Hepatitis B Vaccine?

    Hepatitis B is a rare, mainly blood-transmitted disease. In 1996, only 54 cases of the disease were reported to the CDC in the 0-1 age group. There were 3.9 million births that year, so the observed incidence of hepatitis B in the 0-1 age group was just 0.001%. In the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS), there were 1,080 total reports of adverse reactions from hepatitis B vaccine in 1996 in the 0-1 age group, with 47 deaths reported.

    Let us put this in simpler terms. For every child with hepatitis B, there were 20 that were reported to have severe complications. Let us also remember that only 10% of the reactions are ever reported to VAERS, so this means: traditional medicine is potentially harming 200 children to protect one from hepatitis B.

    How Serious Is a Hepatitis B Infection?

    The numbers speak for themselves. Approximately 50% of patients who contract hepatitis B develop no symptoms after exposure. However, the exposure ensures that they will have lifetime immunity. An additional 30% develop only flu-like symptoms, and again, this group will acquire lifetime immunity. The remaining 20% exposed to hepatitis B will develop the symptoms of the disease. 95% of this 20% will fully recover, with lifetime immunity.

    Therefore, less than 5% of people who contract hepatitis B will become chronic carriers of the infection. The numbers get even smaller: of that 5%, nearly 75% (or 3.75% of the total exposed) will live with an asymptomatic infection and only 25% (or only 1.25% of the total number of people exposed) will develop chronic liver disease or liver cancer, 10-30 years after the acute infection. (Hyams, K.C. (1995) Risks of chronicity following acute hepatitis B virus infection: A review. Clin. Infect. Dis. 20, 992-1000.)

    Think of that in terms of probability: the possibility of contracting the disease is exceedingly difficult for children, and only 1.25% of those that are exposed will actually develop the most serious complication! This type of a “protecting the needle in the haystack” medicine is absurd at best, deadly at worst.

    How Many Safety Studies Have Been Done On Hepatitis B Vaccine?

    None. A manufacturer’s representative was asked in a 1997 Illinois Board of Health hearing to show evidence that the hepatitis B vaccine is safe for a 1-day old infant. The representative stated: “We have none. Our studies were done on 5- and 10-year-olds.” — The Congressional Quarterly, August 25, 2000, pg. 647

    One would think that these would be mandatory, but they are not. All that is required is to show efficacy, (i.e. that the vaccine stimulates an antibody response after it is give), not safety. In most other industries, the fraud represented here would lead to criminal charges.

    Hepatitis B Vaccine: It’s Your Choice

    Since 1991, a series of three hepatitis B shots has been part of the standard federally recommended US childhood vaccination schedule, with the first dose given within the first 12 hours after birth, the second dose given between one and two months of age, and the third dose given between six and 18 months of age. But while it’s part of the federal vaccine schedule, it’s your choicewhether or not to allow your baby to be vaccinated.

    If you’re expecting, the time to research the risks versus the benefits of this vaccination is now, before you deliver, so if you conclude, like many concerned health care professionals and educated parents have, that subjecting all healthy newborns to hepatitis B vaccination within hours of birth is both risky and unnecessary, you can do something to stop it…

    If you decide the hepatitis B vaccine is not appropriate for your baby, you can amend the “consent for medical treatment” forms you sign upon entering the hospital before giving birth by writing on the form that you do not give consent for your baby’s hepatitis B vaccination in the newborn nursery. You should let any nurses or other medical staff taking care of you and your baby know this directly as well.

    However, there are reports that some newborns are being vaccinated in the newborn nursery against the parent’s wishes. So it is a good idea to keep your newborn with you at all times or have a family member stay with the baby while in the hospital.

    That said, it is important to be tested for hepatitis B if you’re pregnant, as it’s possible to have a chronic infection with no symptoms and not know it. If you are pregnant and are a carrier for the hepatitis B virus, your baby could be at risk for being infected during childbirth.

    And although hepatitis B vaccines may be “mandated” for your child to attend school or daycare, most states offer different legal vaccine exemptions (medical, religious, and philosophical). On NVIC.org, you can research your state’s specific vaccine laws and requirements and find out what kind of exemption to hepatitis B vaccination you are allowed to exercise in your state for your child to attend daycare or school. You can also sign up to be a user of NVIC’s free online communications network, the NVIC Advocacy Portal, and take action to protect the legal right to make voluntary vaccine choices in your state.

    Protect Your Right to Informed Consent and Defend Vaccine Exemptions

     

    With all the uncertainty surrounding the safety and efficacy of vaccines, it’s critical to protect your right to make independent health choices and exercise voluntary informed consent to vaccination. It is urgent that everyone in America stand up and fight to protect and expand vaccine informed consent protections in state public health and employment laws. The best way to do this is to get personally involved with your state legislators and educating the leaders in your community.

    THINK GLOBALLY, ACT LOCALLY.

    National vaccine policy recommendations are made at the federal level but vaccine laws are made at the state level. It is at the state level where your action to protect your vaccine choice rights can have the greatest impact. It is critical for EVERYONE to get involved now in standing up for the legal right to make voluntary vaccine choices in America because those choices are being threatened by lobbyists representing drug companies, medical trade associations and public health officials, who are trying to persuade legislators to strip all vaccine exemptions from public health laws.

    Signing up for NVIC’s free Advocacy Portal at www.NVICAdvocacy.org gives you immediate, easy access to your own state legislators on your Smart Phone or computer so you can make your voice heard. You will be kept up-to-date on the latest state bills threatening your vaccine choice rights and get practical, useful information to help you become an effective vaccine choice advocate in your own community. Also, when national vaccine issues come up, you will have the up-to-date information and call to action items you need at your fingertips..

    So please, as your first step, sign up for the NVIC Advocacy Portal.

    Share Your Story with the Media and People You Know

    If you or a family member has suffered a serious vaccine reaction, injury or death, please talk about it. If we don’t share information and experiences with each other, everybody feels alone and afraid to speak up. Write a letter to the editor if you have a different perspective on a vaccine story that appears in your local newspaper. Make a call in to a radio talk show that is only presenting one side of the vaccine story.

    I must be frank with you; you have to be brave because you might be strongly criticized for daring to talk about the “other side” of the vaccine story. Be prepared for it and have the courage to not back down. Only by sharing our perspective and what we know to be true about vaccination will the public conversation about vaccination open up so people are not afraid to talk about it.

    We cannot allow the drug companies and medical trade associations funded by drug companies or public health officials promoting forced use of a growing list of vaccines to dominate the conversation about vaccination. The vaccine injured cannot be swept under the carpet and treated like nothing more than “statistically acceptable collateral damage” of national one-size-fits-all mandatory vaccination policies that put way too many people at risk for injury and death. We shouldn’t be treating people like guinea pigs instead of human beings.

    Internet Resources Where You Can Learn More

    I encourage you to visit the website of the non-profit charity, the National Vaccine Information Center (NVIC), at www.NVIC.org:

    • NVIC Memorial for Vaccine Victims: View descriptions and photos of children and adults, who have suffered vaccine reactions, injuries and deaths. If you or your child experiences an adverse vaccine event, please consider posting and sharing your story here.
    • If You Vaccinate, Ask 8 Questions: Learn how to recognize vaccine reaction symptoms and prevent vaccine injuries.
    • Vaccine Freedom Wall: View or post descriptions of harassment and sanctions by doctors, employers, school and health officials for making independent vaccine choices.

    Connect with Your Doctor or Find a New One that Will Listen and Care

    If your pediatrician or doctor refuses to provide medical care to you or your child unless you agree to get vaccines you don’t want, I strongly encourage you to have the courage to find another doctor. Harassment, intimidation, and refusal of medical care is becoming the modus operandi of the medical establishment in an effort to stop the change in attitude of many parents about vaccinations after they become truly educated about health and vaccination.

    However, there is hope.

    At least 15 percent of young doctors recently polled admit that they’re starting to adopt a more individualized approach to vaccinations in direct response to the vaccine safety concerns of parents. It is good news that there is a growing number of smart young doctors, who prefer to work as partners with parents in making personalized vaccine decisions for children, including delaying vaccinations or giving children fewer vaccines on the same day or continuing to provide medical care for those families, who decline use of one or more vaccines.

    So take the time to locate a doctor, who treats you with compassion and respect and is willing to work with you to do what is right for your child.

     

    [-] Sources and References

Should Parents Be Allowed to Decide About Vaccines?


Story at-a-glance

  • Thirteen percent of parents are now using an alternative vaccination schedule, and two percent refuse all vaccines for their children. Still, 28 percent of parents following the childhood vaccination schedule think it would be safer to delay the use of vaccines.
  • In German children, 11 percent of those vaccinated reported having ear infections, compared to less than 0.5 percent of unvaccinated children. Similarly, sinusitis was reported in over 32 percent of vaccinated children, while the prevalence in unvaccinated children was less than one percent.
  • There are important, basic differences between naturally-acquired immunity and temporary vaccine-induced antibody production. As a parent, you need to educate yourself on each individual disease and corresponding vaccine in order to make an informed decision about the risks and benefits of the choices you make.
  • An important vaccine safety review was issued by the Institute of Medicine (IOM) in August. According to this review of over 1,000 independent studies on vaccines, they were unable to determine whether or not vaccines are a causative factor in over 100 serious adverse health outcomes. In short: the research available is insufficient and cannot be used to confirm nor deny causation for many poor health outcomes and vaccinations

By Dr. Mercola

USA Today1 recently ran an editorial under the headline, “Vaccine opt-outs put public health at risk” and called for elimination of personal belief exemptions in state public health laws, including those that require children to get dozens of doses of up to 15 vaccines in order to attend daycare and school.

“When vaccination rates are very high, as they still are in the nation as a whole, everyone is protected. Diseases such as polio, smallpox and measles are wiped out,” the editorial claims.

“This ‘herd immunity’ protects the most vulnerable, including those who can’t be vaccinated for medical reasons, infants too young to get vaccinated and people on whom the vaccine doesn’t work.

But herd immunity works only when nearly the whole herd joins in. When some refuse vaccinations and seek a free ride, immunity breaks down and everyone is more vulnerable.”

Not Sharing the Risks of Vaccination = Selfish?

The editorial goes on to claim that outbreaks of infectious diseases such as measles are due to the “selfish decisions” of a few, who take vaccine exemptions and place everyone else in the “herd” at risk.

The answer, the editorial board says, is to eliminate personal belief vaccine exemptions from state public health laws and presumably force all children and adults to get every government recommended vaccine. The article finishes off with the curious statement:

“Everyone enjoys the life-saving benefits vaccines provide, but they’ll exist only as long as everyone shares in the risks.” [Emphasis mine]

I call it curious, because nowhere in the editorial did they actually address the issue of health risks associated with vaccines, which is one of the primary reasons for having personal choice in the first place. If safety and effectiveness of the product could be guaranteed, fewer people would have major objections.

Also noteworthy is the editorial board’s statement that herd immunity protects “people on whom the vaccine doesn’t work.” Right there, they admit that vaccination isn’t a foolproof disease prevention strategy. Vaccines can and often do fail to prevent disease.

What USA Today Didn’t Tell You

What they don’t spell out clearly is that the risk of vaccine failure must be weighed in along with the potential risk of harm from the vaccine. That inconvenient truth is cleverly hidden amid inflammatory rhetoric designed to get people to rally against those pesky free-thinkers who have the audacity to do their own risk-benefit analysis.

While the USA Today editorial board admits that there are health risks associated with vaccines and vaccines don’t always work, they still insist that people should not be free to make their own choices when it comes to vaccination. Why?

Apparently, their reasoning goes like this: the only way to have any hope of success in eradicating disease is by forcing everyone to blindly accept the known and potential unknown risks of vaccination.

And since there are risks – even though the newspaper’s editors only acknowledge risk briefly in their OpEd – the only way they say mass vaccination policies are “fair” is by mandatorily distributing the risk across the entire population.

The simpler argument is that it is done for “The Greater Good” and opting out is therefore proclaimed to be “selfish,” which is an old utilitarian rationale that can be challenged on ethical grounds.

Sadly their reasoning is irrational. For starters, the premises of vaccine-induced immunity and herd immunity are both fundamentally flawed, and the medical literature is full of scientific evidence of this—none of which is ever mentioned in newspaper OpEds designed to make you fear and intensely dislike anyone who wants to make well informed, independent vaccine choices for themsleves and their children.

The theory of vaccine-acquired herd immunity, which is regularly used as a justification for forced vaccination, is based on the premise that it will work the same way naturally-acquired herd immunity works. The only problem is that itdoesn’t. For a refresher on herd immunity, and the differences between vaccine-induced and naturally-acquired immunity, please refer to my previous article “Expert Pediatrician Exposes Vaccine Myths.”

Leave Parents Free to Choose Vaccines

Barbara Loe Fisher, co-founder and president of the non-profit National Vaccine Information Center (NVIC) wrote an editorial opposing USA Today’s call for an end to personal belief vaccine exemptions in state laws. She noted that US health officials now recommend twice as many vaccines compared to three decades ago.

If you follow the recommended vaccine schedule, your child will receive no less than 69 doses of 16 vaccines. Up to 15 of those vaccines are mandated by different states. Yet despite this cornucopia of “preventive medicine,” American children are among the sickest in the developed world.

“With 95 percent of US kindergarteners fully vaccinated and one child in six learning disabled, one in 10 asthmatic and one in 50 living with autism, educated parents and health care professionals are asking legitimate questions about why so many highly vaccinated children are so sick,”Fisher writes.

“They’re examining vaccine science shortfalls and wondering why Americans are coerced and punished for declining to use every government-recommended vaccine while citizens in Canada, Japan and the European Union are free to make choices.

Vaccines carry two risks: a risk of harm and a risk of failure to prevent disease. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention admit that US pertussis outbreaks are not due to a failure to vaccinate but failure of the vaccine to confer long-lasting immunity…

When doctors cannot predict who will be harmed by a vaccine and cannot guarantee that those who have been vaccinated won’t get infected or transmit infection, the ethical principle of informed consent becomes a civil, human and parental right that must be safeguarded in US law. Non-medical vaccine exemptions immunize individuals and the community against unsafe, ineffective vaccines and tyranny.”

Fortunately, judging by the newspaper’s reader polls, few Americans agree with the USA Today editorial board. In fact, 82 percent of readers (as of this writing) “strongly disagree” with the editorial. In contrast, 85 percent of readers “strongly agree” with Fisher’s “pro-vaccine choice” rebuttal. Clearly, most Americans who took the time to cast their vote expressed strong opposition to the newspaper’s “anti-choice” stance and were not fooled by the same old emotion-based propaganda. And that’s good news.

Is Mass Vaccination Causing Unforeseen Consequences?

When it comes to vaccination, there are a lot of unanswered questions. Some of these questions include:

  • Could injecting up to 69 doses of various vaccines into a child beginning on the day of birth and throughout childhood create immune system problems over the long term?
  • What are the multi-generational effects of forcing our immune systems to react to vaccines rather than naturally-occurring pathogens? One recent study2 found that women who received the Tdap vaccine during pregnancy had children whose immune responses to vaccination was far weaker compared to children whose mothers were not vaccinated.

Animals that are not yet weaned are typically not vaccinated as the mother’s milk is known to interfere with antibody responses to vaccines. Many animals are titered to ensure they don’t receive excessive vaccines, as the side effects are well known. As explained by veterinarian Dr. Jean Dodd:3

“A titer test is a simple blood test that measures a dog or cat’s antibodies to vaccine viruses (or other infectious agents). For instance, your dog may be more resistant to a virus whereas your neighbor’s dog may be more prone to it. Titers accurately assess protection to the so-called ‘core’ diseases (distemper, parvovirus, hepatitis in dogs, and panleukopenia in cats), enabling veterinarians to judge whether a booster vaccination is necessary. “

So, we’re titering animals but not children? There are plenty of reasons not to accept a mandated one-size-fits-all vaccination policy: the right to self determination being first and foremost. The decision to participate in a medical intervention or experiment that carries serious risks, whether the risk is high or low, should belong to each individual person, including parents of minor children who are legally and morally responsible for protecting their children.

The Case for Reasonable Doubt

What is some of the evidence raising reasonable doubt about the “reasonableness” of forced vaccinations? How about the following:

  • Environmental toxins can reduce vaccine efficacy. Research published in the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) suggests that exposure to perfluorinated compounds (PFCs) prior to, and after birth, can significantly weaken the effectiveness of vaccines. PFCs are found in countless products, including non-stick cookware and food wrappings, personal care, and cleaning products, just to name a few. If poorly regulated environmental pollutants can dramatically decrease vaccine effectiveness, then that means your risk-to-benefit ratio of vaccination is automatically skewed toward higher risk and lower benefit. As reported by ABC News:4

“The study found that higher levels of PFCs in both mothers and children meant lower numbers of disease-fighting antibodies in the children. Mothers who had twice the level of PFC in their blood had children with a 40 percent decrease in the number of antibodies formed after getting the diphtheria vaccine. The 7-year-old children who had doubled PFC levels had nearly a 50 percent reduction in their antibody levels.”

  • Vaccinated people are asymptomatic carriers of disease, and can still both spread and contract the disease. Mounting evidence shows that vaccinated people can actually unknowingly be infected with and spread diseases like pertussis (whooping cough) for which they were vaccinated. This was shown in an FDA baboon study5 last year, which concluded that while the pertussis vaccine can cut down on serious clinical disease symptoms, it does not eliminatetransmission of the disease. As noted by the lead author of the research, when the baby baboons were newly vaccinated with either DPT or DTaP vaccines, they were asymptomatic carriers of pertussis and could infect others in their community.

Needless to say, if vaccinated people can be asymptomatic carriers of disease, this can place everyone at risk and really raises questions about the wisdom of vaccinating health care workers before permitting them to work with high-risk populations. Vaccinated people can still contract the disease because (a) most vaccine-acquired artificial immunity istemporary,6 and (b) because microbes can evolve to evade the vaccines.

For example, 97 percent of those who contracted mumps during the outbreak in Ohio earlier this year were fully vaccinated7against the disease. Some are quick to say that “sure, vaccinated people can contract the disease—if exposed; which is why no one should be allowed to opt out of vaccination.” However, when a vaccinated person can contract the disease from another vaccinated person… this entire argument clearly falls apart.

  • Flu vaccination raises your risk of contracting more serious flu illness. Research published in 2012 showed that theflu vaccine increases your risk of contracting more serious pandemic flu illness,8 such as H1N1. This supported previous findings, such as that from a 2011 study,9 which found that the seasonal flu vaccine actually weakened children’s immune systems, thereby increasing their chances of getting sick from influenza viruses not included in the vaccine. Unvaccinated children actually built up more antibodies against a wider variety of influenza virus strains than the vaccinated children.
  • Vaccines promote disease mutations. Vaccines have also been found to place pressure on microbes to developmutated versions of the disease, and/or enhance the ability of other similar strains to become more dominant and cause disease. For example, a veterinary vaccine study10 at the University of Melbourne (Australia) found that using two different vaccine viruses to combat the same disease in an animal population quite rapidly caused the viruses to combine (referred to as recombination), creating brand new and more virulent viruses.

In Australia, dangerous new strains of whooping cough bacteria were reported in March 2012.11 The vaccine, researchers said, was responsible. The reason for this is because while whooping cough is primarily attributed to Bordetella pertussisinfection, it is also caused by another closely related pathogen called B. parapertussis, which the vaccine does NOT protect against.

Two years earlier, scientists at Penn State had already reported that the pertussis vaccine significantly enhanced the colonization of B. parapertussis, thereby promoting vaccine-resistant whooping cough outbreaks.12 According to the authors, vaccination led to a 40-fold enhancement of B. parapertussis colonization in the lungs of mice, and the data suggested that the vaccine may be contributing to the observed rise in whooping cough incidence over the last decade by promoting B. parapertussis infection instead.

Fraudulent Research Does Not Inspire Confidence

Please understand that efficacy of a vaccine relates to its ability to produce an antibody and this is NOT at all a good marker for whether or not immunity has been achieved, while effectiveness measures the ability of the vaccine to actually protect against infection. So let’s look at the basic effectiveness of vaccines, and the reliability of the research backing up effectiveness claims. On a number of occasions, outright fraud has been revealed, raising serious doubts about whether or not the stated benefit—the ability of the vaccine to prevent disease—is even part of the risk-benefit equation. If not, you’re taking on risk with very minimal, if any, benefit.

Case in point: in 2012, two former Merck virologists sued their former employer, claiming Merck overstated the effectiveness of the mumps vaccine in the company’s combination MMR shot. A federal antitrust class action lawsuit was also filed that year, in which Merck was accused of falsifying test results and selling millions of doses of the vaccine that were of “questionable efficacy.”

Clearly, vaccine effectiveness has a major bearing on disease outbreaks, and it would appear as though many vaccine failures are simply covered up by blaming outbreaks on the unvaccinated population. This way, ineffective vaccines can still be sold, while everyone’s busy tarring and feathering those who have opted out of using every government recommended vaccine. You know, those who “selfishly” choose not to “share in the risks.”

Another example: in 2012, a systematic review13 of pre- and post-licensure trials of the HPV vaccine showed that the vaccine’s effectiveness is not only overstated (through the use of selective reporting or “cherry picking” data) but also unproven. According to the authors: “[T]he widespread optimism regarding HPV vaccines long-term benefits appears to rest on a number of unproven assumptions (or such which are at odds with factual evidence) and significant misinterpretation of available data.”

2013 HPV vaccine effectiveness study also turned out to have significant discrepancies, raising doubts about the veracity of its conclusions. Upon closer scrutiny, the data actually revealed that unvaccinated girls had the best outcome. Furthermore, records obtained last year through a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit against the Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS) revealed that the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program has so far awarded nearly $5.9 million to 49 victims for harm and/or death resulting from the HPV vaccine.

According to an April 7 report by WCPO News,14 the VAERS database has received more than 31,000 reports of adverse reactions to the HPV vaccine Gardasil. This is up from May 13, 2013, at which point VAERS had received 29,686 adverse event reports (including 136 deaths, 922 reports of disability, and 550 life-threatening adverse events). Is it reasonable to doubt the safety and efficacy of Gardasil? Ask Tracie Moorman, whose 15-year-old daughter Maddie became too chronically ill to attend school after receiving the HPV vaccine. “If I ever could have a do-over, it absolutely would be this situation,” Tracie told WCPO in a recent interview.

Vaccinated vs. Unvaccinated: Who’s Healthier?

Large studies comparing the health outcomes of vaccinated versus unvaccinated children have not been a priority for vaccine researchers. This is a travesty, as this is the kind of research most desperately needed. Most vaccine studies are about developing more vaccines for children and adults to use.

Some claim that studies comparing the health of highly vaccinated and unvaccinated children cannot be done because it would be “unethical” to leave children participating in the study unvaccinated in order to do the comparison. But since some American parents are already delaying or avoiding vaccinating their children, this hardly seems like a reasonable excuse. It is more likely that comparing the health of vaccinated and unvaccinated children in appropriately designed studies are avoided because the results might upset the proverbial apple cart.

However, that doesn’t mean there is a total absence of evidence about the health of vaccinated versus unvaccinated children to give us an indication of whether or not the use of many more vaccines by children in the U.S. is contributing to so many being chronically ill and disabled. In December 2010, a survey was initiated by VaccineInjury.info to compare the health of vaccinated children with unvaccinated children. The survey is ongoing, so if you would like to participate, you can. Though this is obviously not a double-blind controlled study, and depends on the individuals submitting the data to give accurate information, it is still revealing. At the time of this writing, the results show:

Health Condition Prevalence in Vaccinated Children Prevalence in Unvaccinated Children
Allergies 36.71% 11.25%
Asthma 14.23% 2.26%
Hay fever 17.86% of German children 3%
Neurodermatitis (an autoimmune disorder) 23.9% 7.5%
Attention deficit disorder (ADD) 14.94% 1.28%
Middle ear infections 20.84% 7.5%
Sinusitis 12.14% 2.5%
Autism 7.43% 0.49%

Do You Want the Right to Choose Vaccination for Yourself and Your Child?

So, what do we know, and what can we be sure of? One thing that appears to be beyond dispute, based on overwhelming evidence that spans across decades, is that pharmaceutical companies have repeatedly demonstrated their willingness to bribe, lie, threaten and commit fraud in order to bring, and keep, their products on the market. This kind of behavior is so commonplace, it appears to be part and parcel of the accepted modus operandi of the drug industry, albeit unofficially.

So, based on what you know, do you think parents should have the legal right to choose whether or not to give their children every one of the dozens of doses of 15 vaccines that health officials mandate for infants and children attending school and daycare? Do you want that right to know and freedom to choose for yourself which vaccines you are going to get?

I cannot impress upon you strongly enough the importance of your active involvement when it comes to defending our legal right to make informed vaccine choices in America. In order to protect the health of as many children as possible, we cannot continue to ignore the signs that using vaccines as the nation’s primary disease prevention strategy may have been taken too far in the past three decades – to the point that we’re now seeing the health of too many children and adults being compromised..

When you follow the money, you realize that multi-national drug companies marketing vaccines and the organizations they fund are the ones pulling the political strings to eliminate non-medical vaccine exemptions in U.S. state laws. Eliminating the freedom to know and right to choose nationwide would be a major coup by a pharmaceutical industry already making huge profits from vaccine laws that require every person born in America to purchase and use their products. At the same time, the safety of vaccine policies are primarily based on the word of these very companies that not only have their products mandated but also enjoy a liability shield from vaccine injury lawsuits in civil court that was given to them by Congress and the Supreme Court!

Is any of this really wise?

No Time to Waste – Take Action Now

The non-profit National Vaccine Information Center (NVIC) has been working for 32 years to prevent vaccine injuries and deaths through public education and defend the informed consent ethic in vaccine policies and laws. NVIC is leading a grassroots movement to secure and protect broad medical, religious, and conscientious belief vaccine exemptions in state public health laws to prevent parents of minor children and adult workers from being discriminated against and harmed by “no exceptions” mandatory vaccination policies.

On NVIC’s Cry for Vaccine Freedom Wall, you can read (and post) first-hand accounts of threats and coercion by pediatricians, government officials, and employers harrassing and punishing Americans for refusing to get every government recommended and mandated vaccine. It is heartbreaking to read how many people are being bullied into using vaccines against their will – even individuals who have already suffered vaccine reactions and injuries!

In the past few years, states like Washington, Oregon and California have restricted the use of non-medical exemptions and theColorado legislature is currently debating similar legislation. NVIC has testified and has educated families and helped them testify in public hearings in those states.

To become active in your state and make sure your community and elected officials are fully informed about the importance of protecting vaccine exemptions in state laws, sign up for the free online NVIC Advocacy Portal. You will be notified by email when vaccine legislation is moving in your state to restrict or expand vaccine exemptions. You will also be put into direct electronic contact with your own elected officials and can let them know your views with a touch on your smart phone screen or a keystroke on your tablet or computer. If we all stand up for our right to know and freedom to choose the way we want to stay healthy – including whether or not we choose to use vaccines – we will be protecting a fundamental right we cannot afford to lose.

 

 http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2014/04/29/children-vaccines.aspx?e_cid=20140429Z3_DNL_art_1&utm_source=dnl&utm_medium=email&utm_content=art1&utm_campaign=20140429Z3&et_cid=DM45208&et_rid=502669170

Woman’s Stomach Ache Really a 9-Pound Baby-


JENNIFER SCOLLIN DELIVERED A SURPRISE BABY BOY SATURDAY

By Evann Gastaldo,  Newser Staff

(NEWSER) – Jennifer Scollin hadn’t been feeling well lately and chalked it up to a stomach bug that was going around. But when the Connecticut woman woke up Saturday morning with bad stomach pains, she called her boyfriend to come home—and minutes after he did, her water broke. They called 911, and she ended up delivering their second child in an ambulance parked in her driveway. “We didn’t know at first it was a baby coming, but once we did it happened fast,” she tells the Connecticut Post. “Two pushes and he was out.”

Scollin says she never suspected she might be pregnant: “I had been feeling fine until the past few days and I had been getting my ‘womanly thing’ every month until last month,” she says. And the 9-pound, 3-ounce Cole Michael Thomas Dillman is Scollin’s second child, so she is well versed in what pregnancy (usually) feels like. Scollin and her son are both doing well and were discharged from the hospital yesterday. Notes a hospital rep, “This sort of situation is uncommon, but we are always prepared for anything.” Indeed: A similar situation played out Feb. 28 in Indiana, where a mother-of-two went to the hospital (after putting in an 8-hour shift on her feet at her assembly line job) with what she feared was a burst appendix; Mandy Batchelor gave birth to a full-term baby boy, report theBanner-Graphic and WLS. (In this recent case, a woman knew she was pregnant but received a big surprise during delivery.)

Pregnant woman died after wrong organ removed- the horror of modern medicine


By Kate Seamons

As far as medical mix-ups go, it’s a horrifying one. In October 2011, a 32-year-old woman underwent an operation at Queen’s Hospital outside of London; Maria De Jesus was suffering from appendicitis and needed to have her appendix removed.

Instead, her right ovary was taken out, and De Jesus, who was 21 weeks pregnant with her fourth child at the time, ended up dying roughly three weeks later.

The case is now in front of a medical tribunal, which is weighing the medical fates of the two doctors involved, then-trainee surgeon Dr. Yahya Al-Abed, and Dr.

Babatunde Coker, who was supposed to be supervising him. During the Oct. 23 surgery, De Jesus began to bleed “quite heavily. … In the midst of this, Mr. Al-Abed removed what he clearly believed to be the appendix. He thought he found it, removed it, and gave to a nurse what later turned out to be Patient A’s ovary,” the tribunal heard.

Coker, who was eating lunch at the time, was never summoned, nor was he aware the surgery was taking place. The mistake wasn’t uncovered until much later.

The Telegraph reports that De Jesus returned to the hospital in severe pain on Nov. 7; two days later another doctor realized she still had her appendix, and the next day she went into surgery to have it actually removed.

Instead, she died on the OR table, having earlier delivered a stillborn boy. Her cause of death was ruled as multiple organ failure due to septicemia.

The Press Association reports the hearing will likely last a month. (A New York man is suing over an appendix mix-up of his own.)

More From Newser

Hepatitis B Vaccine & Systemic Lupus Erythematosus


  from vaccine truth

If there is anything such as ‘breaking news’ and ‘stop the presses’, it ought to be this: Hepatitis B vaccine can cause Systemic Lupus Erythematosus (SLE).

That’s what the U.S. National Vaccine Injury Compensation (NVIC) Program agreed, accepted, and settled in the lawsuit brought on behalf of Tambra Harris, who contracted SLE after receiving the Hepatitis B vaccine and subsequently died from SLE.

See http://childhealthsafety.wordpress.com/2011/04/25/us-concedes-hep-b-causes-lupus/

Wait a minute! Isn’t Hepatitis B vaccine mandated for newborns within 24 hours of their birth? Yes! It’s the first vaccination that starts an infant on the treadmill of neurotoxic vaccinations that continue into 2, 4, 6, 12, 15, 18, 19-23 months, 2-3 years, and 4-6 years—that’s for starters! See the CDC’s Immunization Schedule for children athttp://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/recs/schedules/downloads/child/0-6yrs-schedule-pr.pdf

Childhood vaccinations are ‘required’ from 7 to 18 years of a child’s life; check out this CDC site http://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/recs/schedules/downloads/child/7-18yrs-schedule-bw.pdf

In view of the March 22, 2011 NVIC agreement signed by Patricia E. Campbell-Smith, Special Master of the vaccine court, that Hep B did cause Ms. Harris’s SLE, the vaccine court agreed to a lump sum of $475,000 compensation for damages and that $9,914 be paid to the State of Mississippi Division of Medicaid for expenses related to Tambra’s care, everyone—parents, FDA, CDC, HHS, and Congress—ought to demand an immediate hiatus—if not permanent ban—on injecting Hep B into a newborn baby.

Hepatitis B usually is contracted from using street drug needles and unprotected sexual intercourse—something newborns don’t interact with. The only exception would be if the newborn’s mother has Hepatitis B, then the vaccine may be helpful. Otherwise, why expose a newborn to the neurotoxic adjuvants aluminum hydroxide or aluminum hydroxyphosphate sulfate, depending upon vaccine manufacturer; or possibly, the EPA-declared carcinogen, formaldehyde, depending upon vaccine manufacturer.

The insidious practice of injecting neurotoxins into newborns and then at 2, 4, 6 months onward into teenage years guarantees several things: An annuity for Big Pharma and vaccine makers; increased U.S. healthcare costs; staggering statistics and demographics regarding ADD, ADHD, Autism Disorder Spectrum, possible childhood diabetes, and an entire spectrum of chronic childhood diseases that scientific research is proving associated with Autoimmune/inflammatory Syndrome Induced by Adjuvants (ASIA) as published in the Journal Autoimmunology 2011 Feb; 36 (1):4-8.

See http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20708902

Flu Vaccine Guillain Barre And Other Disabling Nerve Conditions for www.muftisays.com


Each year in the United States, between 5 % and 20% of the population will contract the flu–also known as influenza. The flu is a highly contagious disease that is spread through coughing, sneezing and close contact. Defined by its high fever, cough, muscle aches and fatigue, that results in nearly 200,000 hospitalizations and thousands of dollars in medical expense. However, a reaction to flu vaccine can be just as costly.

CDC Push For All To Be Vaccinated For The Flu

Every year the Centers for Disease Control works overtime to encourage all citizens to be vaccinated against the flu.  While most people do not suffer reactions to flu vaccine, there are those who are now faced with serious disabilities thanks to a reaction to flu vaccine.  A lifelong disabling reaction to flu vaccine includes sudden onset illnesses that effect the nervous system–particularly flu vaccine Guillain Barre syndrome, brachial neuritis, and CIDP (Chronic Inflammatory Demyelinating Polyneuropathy).

Reaction To Flu Vaccine : Symptoms Are Often Dismissed

Many physicians dismiss the sudden appearance of a reaction to flu vaccine that can occur either immediately following vaccination or in the weeks to come.  Reaction to flu vaccine usually occurs within the first 30 days after administration.  For example, flu vaccine Guillain Barre will usually start within 2 weeks.  However the number of patients who complain of a reaction to flu vaccine develop symptoms rapidly or progressed immediately following receipt of the vaccine could be much higher than originally thought. Testimonies abound from people all across the country who blame a reaction to flu vaccine for illnesses that have cost them their livelihood.

Flu Vaccine Guillain Barre : Your Body Attacks Itself

Flu vaccine Guillain Barre syndrome is one of the most common reported reaction to flu vaccine.  GBS is a condition where the body’s immune system attacks the nerves. Most commonly flu vaccine Guillain Barre begins in the legs and feet with tingling, weakness and loss of control– but can quickly progress up the body effecting the muscles that control breathing which makes the condition a serious medical emergency. Many patients who develop flu vaccine Guillain Barre must be placed on a respirator to help them breathe until the condition begins to resolve. For some who have had flu vaccine Guillain Barre, permanent weakness will never go away and could require assistive devices for walking and daily tasks.

CIDP : GBS That Keeps Going

Chronic Inflammatory Polyneuropathy (CIDP) is a cousin to flu vaccine Guillain Barre. CIDP is similar in action to GBS, effecting multiple nerves throughout the body equally. However the main difference between the two is that CIDP often lasts longer than flu vaccine Guillain Barre and is in fact usually permanent. In some cases, patients who suffer from CIDP may have times when symptoms will resolve only to recur. CIDP often results in permanent paralysis and loss of muscle mass in varying degrees. It may effect only the lower extremities or the entire body in some form.

Brachial Neuritis : Serious Arm and Shoulder Pain

Conditions like Brachial Neuritis (BN) have also been found to occur after flu vaccination. The condition, which is thought to also be caused by an immune triggered response causes severe pain and nerve damage to the muscles of the neck and shoulder area which results in paralyzation of the shoulder and muscles over the shoulder blades of the back.

Based on a survey completed by Medical News Today, 30% of Americans said that they would not be getting a flu vaccine this year citing fears about reaction to flu vaccine, like flu vaccine Guillain Barre. The government’s exaggerated fears of a pandemic and the desire to boost their own immune function naturally. Though not all of these reasons are scientifically proven to be accurate, each person has the right to choose.

The horrendous side effects of Gardasil/HPV vaccine


Kelly E. McFarland (Leesburg, Virginia)

http://sanevax.org/mickayla-from-maine/

Kelly was a healthy, athletic girl until she had mononucleosis at the age of 15½ in May of 2006. By December 2006, she had almost recovered and her pediatrician recommended Gardasil.  Her dates of vaccinations were 12/15/2006 (Lot 0637F); 2/15/2007 (Lot 0186U) and her final vaccination was on 6/2/2007 (Lot 0522U).

My daughter’s illnesses have covered a three year period and she has still not recovered.

Kelly’s symptoms  during this period of time have included:  Immediately Urinary tract infections – 5; Upper respiratory trait infection, strep throat 3 times, progressing to joint pain, muscle pain, muscle weakness, fatigue, irregular but very painful periods, memory loss, moodiness, anger, occasional slurred speech, 2 bumps growing under the skin on her face, insomnia, panic attacks, runny nose all the time (had no allergies previously), body temperature issues, gastrointestinal issues and night sweats.  Kelly was diagnosed with Posterial Orthostatic Tachacardia Syndrome (POTS) in April 2009.

Kelly’s days are all the same, she wakes up and is in pain all day long – joint, neck, shins, knees and her body is sensitive to touch.  She cannot take a shower and lift her arm over her head, walking upstairs causes her heart to race and she cannot get to sleep without medication.  Her sleeping pattern has been completely altered and she can sleep two days in a row.  If she is not vomiting or having diarrhea with a stomach upset, then she is constipated.  Her concentration levels are poor and Kelly cannot sit down and read a book, which she always used to enjoy.  She is constantly exhausted and this is just not the young girl I used to have.

Up until May 5, 2006, Kelly was a healthy, active 15½ year old teenager getting A’s and B’s in school and playing volleyball in national tournaments.  Kelly had to give up volleyball because of her chronic illness and in February 2009 had to medically withdraw from college due to medical disability.

(Email address: danadmc66@yahoo.com)

This is Mickayla, a dedicated student, defender of those who are picked on, and my only daughter. She is my little make-up artist with dreams of living and working in New York City. Mickayla is a small town girl with visions of big city lights and a bright future.

I am a hospice nurse. My job is to care for the terminally ill. As a matter of fact, one of my very dear friends is currently experiencing the ravages of terminal cervical cancer. Obviously, I feel it extremely important to do everything in my power to protect my only daughter from this disease. Using a vaccine to prevent cervical cancer seemed to be a logical way to make the job of protecting my daughter a little easier. We made the decision to take advantage of the opportunity.

Unfortunately for my daughter, that was the wrong decision. Since that day, our lives have been turned upside-down.

My 15 year old was inoculated with Gardasil on December 29, 2011. On January 28, 2012, Mickayla was diagnosed with shingles. I told her provider that the only thing that was different in her internal or external environment was the Gardasil shot. The provider said it wasn’t connected.

February 29, 2012, she received her second Gardasil injection. By the end of March, Mickayla was experiencing hives that came and went on a daily basis. Sometimes, they covered her entire body. I kept thinking they would go away; but they just kept getting worse. We removed all scented products from her environment.

June 2012, we went back to the provider because the hives were still a problem. Both Mickayla and I told the provider that we were concerned Gardasil may be the problem. It was the only new thing in her environment. Her provider told us to “stop being anxious.” She said, “Don’t look on the internet; this is most likely nothing.” She referred us to an allergy specialist.

The specialist did 60 skin tests and drew blood to try and find a cause. Everything came back normal. He put her on Allegra and Zertec. He stated that it was unlikely Gardasil was the cause because the symptoms did not appear for weeks after the injections. He said that if the reaction had occurred sooner, that it might be an allergic reaction; but since it took so long there was most likely no connection. He said she had “unstable mast cells” that were just releasing histamine and said it is not uncommon.

He also recommended that Mickayla go ahead and take the third shot in the Gardasil series because she had “come this far” and he felt she needed to be protected. Having been reassured that Gardasil had nothing to do with Mickayla’s new medical conditions, she received the third injection of Gardasil on July 11, 2012.

By the 15th of August, she had to be taken to see her primary physician with worsening hives and wheals (localized areas of edema on the body surface, often attended with severe itching and usually evanescent; it is the typical lesion of urticaria) all over her legs. Over the next few days, they developed into wheals that turned purple in the middle. She was also experiencing joint pain and fatigue. Sometimes, the wheals on her feet hurt so bad that she had a hard time walking. Her allergist prescribed Singulair, Allegra, Zertec, and Clariton daily, with hydroxazine at night so she could sleep. Nothing helped.

Finally, Mickayla went on a prednisone taper. The wheals disappeared but the hives persisted. When the taper ended, the wheals came back and the hives are worse than ever.

My daughter has lived with hives, wheals, joint pain and fatigue for the last seven months. She has to get ice packs at school to sooth the pain and itch enough to make it through the day. I wake up every day sick to my stomach, knowing that I have done this to my child. Mickayla had autoimmune urticaria. Her immune system is damaged, it was reacting to each shot and no one would believe us. The doctors said it was not connected – that she needed the last injection. I listened to them.

I sit on the edge of the bed with Mickayla…I watch her on her computer as she scrolls through pictures of hotels in Times Square. She and I are planning a trip to New York for a cosmetic convention with her aunt for her 16th birthday. She looks at the screen with sparkling eyes. I see her reach up and flick her nails across her skin. She chatters away and the more excited she gets, the more she starts scratching. The hives come and go as I think about the joint pain and fatigue that she has ‘to put up with.’

This is not fair! Our daughters are not science experiments. Gardasil is not a ‘one-size-fits-all’ vaccine. I thought my doctors knew about this shot. I thought they understood all the ins and outs, all the potential side effects, how long the vaccine lasted and who should not receive the vaccine. I found out too late that none of them knew anything about Gardasil except that the CDC recommends every girl and boy between the ages of 11 and 26 receive it.

I believe, as health care providers, we have an obligation to be honest about the risks as well as the benefits of Gardasil so people can make truly informed decisions. We need to learn to recognize vaccine reactions so we can treat them properly when they occur. We need to identify who is at risk for adverse reactions. We have an obligation to do no harm.

Personally, I will be doing everything in my power to make sure these things happen.

US Government Concedes Hep B Vaccine Causes Systemic Lupus Erythematosus


US Government Concedes Hep B Vaccine Causes Systemic Lupus Erythematosus

Here we present the US Federal Court’s decision and order in full below.

The claimant in this case was dead when the damages were awarded. Tambra Harris died on November 9, 2009. Tambra’s mother and Administratix of her estate, Louvonia Deniece Harris, was substituted as petitioner, and an amended petition was filed on October 15, 2010.

Hepatitis B vaccine is given to US infants at birth for a disease which they are not at risk of.

Why? At risk groups are intravenous “recreational” drug abusers and those who practice unsafe sex – which rules out new born babies.

Whilst the risk factors for babies have changed little, there is now impressive evidence that for a preventive measure, hepatitis B vaccine is remarkable for the frequency, variety and severity of complications from its use. The toxicity of this vaccine is so unusual that, even if crucial data are regrettably concealed or covered by Court order, scientific evidence is already far higher than normally needed to justify severe restrictive measures.

Quote from French expert Dr. Marc Girard.  See CHS article below for full details: UK Government Caught Lying On Baby Hep B Vax Safety.  Whilst other evidence is embargoed by the French Courts, Dr Girard has been able to publish a scientific review of the unembargoed evidence from the French Courts of the vaccine’s hazards (Autoimmun Rev 2005; 4: 96-100). Dr Girard shows that French health authorities suppress studies demonstrating serious risks. Hepatitis B vaccine has been shown in many peer reviewed research papers [including from Harvard University – detailed references at end] to be associated with numerous infant deaths in the USA and Europe, multiple sclerosis and numerous chronic auto-immune disorders [see below for more details].

In the United States Court of Federal Claims
OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS
No. 01-499V
(E-Filed: March 23, 2011)

TO BE PUBLISHED –  Stipulated Damages; Hepatitis B Vaccine; Alleged Injuries Include Systemic Lupus Erythematosus (SLE)

_______________________________________
LOUONIA DENIECE HARRIS,
Administratrix of the Estate of TAMBRA
HARRIS,

Petitioner,

v.

SECRETARY OF THE DEPARTMENT OF
HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES,

Respondent.
______________________________________

STIPULATED DAMAGES DECISION1

On August 29, 2001, Tambra Harris (“petitioner”), filed a petition for compensation alleging that she suffered certain injuries as a result of receiving a vaccination. 2

Among the injuries petitioner alleged that she had suffered as a result of receiving a hepatitis B vaccination was systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE).  She sought an award under the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program 3

On March 22, 2011, counsel for both parties filed a stipulation, stating that a decision should be entered awarding compensation. The parties stipulated that petitioner shall receive the following compensation:

A lump sum of $ 475,000.00 in the form of a check payable to petitioner as Administratrix of the Estate of Tambra Harris. This amount represents compensation for all damages that would be available under 42 U.S.C. §300aa-15(a);

and

A lump sum payment of $ 9,914.00 in the form of a check jointly payable to petitioner and the State of Mississippi Division of Medicaid, Attn: Ms. Carolyn Hall Williams, Third Party Liability Unit, 550 High Street, Walter Sillers Building, Suite 1000, Jackson MS 39201, for reimbursement of Mississippi’s Medicaid expenses related to Tambra’s care.

Stipulation ¶ 8(a) and ¶ 8(b).

The undersigned approves the requested amount for petitioner’s compensation. Accordingly, an award should be made in the form of a check payable to petitioner as Administratrix of the Estate of Tambra Harris in the amount of $ 475,000.00.   In addition, an additional award should be made in the form of a check payable jointly to petitioner and the State of Mississippi Division of Medicaid in the amount of $ 9,914.00. In the absence of a motion for review filed pursuant to RCFC Appendix B, the clerk of the court SHALL ENTER JUDGMENT in accordance with the terms of the parties’ stipulation. 4

IT IS SO ORDERED.
s/Patricia E. Campbell-Smith
Patricia E. Campbell-Smith
Special Master.

1 Because this decision contains a reasoned explanation for the undersigned’s action in this case, the undersigned intends to post this decision on the United States Court of Federal Claims’ website, in accordance with the E-Government Act of 2002, Pub. L. No. 107-347, 116 Stat. 2899, 2913 (Dec. 17, 2002). As provided by Vaccine Rule 18(b), each party has 14 days within which to request redaction “of any information furnished by that party: (1) that is a trade secret or commercial or financial in substance and is privileged or confidential; or (2) that includes medical files or similar files, the disclosure of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of privacy.” Vaccine Rule 18(b). Otherwise, “the entire” decision will be available to the public. Id. (the Act or the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986, Pub. L. No. 99-660, 100 Stat. 3755, codified as amended, 42 U.S.C. §§ 300aa-1 to -34 (2006) (Vaccine Act or the Act). All citations in this decision to individual sections of the Vaccine Act are to 42 U.S.C. § 300aa.

2 Tambra Harris died on November 9, 2009. Tambra’s mother and Administratix of her estate, Louvonia Deniece Harris, was substituted as petitioner, and an amended petition was filed on October 15, 2010.

3 The National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program is set forth in Part 2 of the Program). 42 U.S.C. §§ 300aa-1 to -34 (2006).

4 Pursuant to Vaccine Rule 11(a), entry of judgment is expedited by the parties’ joint filing of notice renouncing the right to seek review.

___________________________________________________________________

UK Government Caught Lying On Baby Hep B Vax Safety

Posted on April 13, 2009

The British Government has been caught lying this week in news reports in two British Sunday newspapers about a proposal to give 8 week old British babies Hepatitis B vaccinations.

A Department of Health spokesman was quoted claiming:-

The safety of children is always paramount whenever decisions are taken regarding what vaccines are included as part of the child vaccination programme.New vaccination fears over plan to give hepatitis jabs at eight weeks old Mail on Sunday 12th April 2009, Vaccination fears over plan for Hepatitis B jabs for babies : Sunday Telegraph 12 Apr 2009.

Only cost and not safety is legally permitted to be an objection under the UK New Labour Government’s new law in effect from April 1 this year [full details below].  Whilst 8 week old babies are not at risk from Hepatitis B, they are from the vaccine [full details below].  And six five EU Hepatitis B vaccines have lost their marketing authorisations since 2000, the latest being last week – GlaxoSmithKline’s Hepatitis B Energix B vaccine [full details below].

Hepatitis B vaccine has been shown in many peer reviewed research papers [including from Harvard University – detailed references at end] to be associated with numerous infant deaths  in the USA and Europe, multiple sclerosis and numerous chronic auto-immune disorders.  These latter include Guillain-Barre syndrome, lupus, rheumatism, blood disorders and chronic fatigue.  The only potential claimed infant risk group is alleged to be babies born in the UK to mothers from countries with claimed-to-have high rates of infection.  Around 2000 British born infants are already being vaccinated annually in the UK.  At risk groups are intravenous “recreational” drug abusers and those who practice unsafe sex – which rules out 8 week old babies.

There has been a criminal judicial investigation in France into the adverse effects of this vaccine.  France was the first country to introduce universal Hepatitis B vaccination and saw effects  which included the first ever seen and harrowing cases of childhood multiple sclerosis in France.

Research also shows that the prevalence of Hepatitis B is low in the UK, consistent with previous estimates and suggesting that many infections were acquired outside the UK. This all suggests Government should concentrate its efforts on effective treatment rather than vaccination of infants against a disease which does not affect them. Proponents of the vaccination claim rates of Hepatitis B infection are “spiralling” but based on “estimates”. Regrettably “estimates” can be “pulled” in one direction or another depending on which direction those responsible for the “estimates” are more interested in seeing them move.  And in these circumstances, they can never be justification for vaccinating all babies to protect adult drug abusers and practitioners of unsafe sex.

Additionally, UK and EU authorities have withdrawn marketing licences for6 5 Hepatitis vaccines claiming a lack of efficacy in some cases, voluntary withdrawal by the applicant in others and denying in one case [Hexavac] any association with 6 infant deaths in Germany. The deaths were reported in a 2005 research paper as possibly caused by the vaccine:Unexplained cases of sudden infant death shortly after hexavalent vaccination.” Zinka B, Rauch E, Buettner A, Rueff F, Penning R. – Vaccine. 2005 May 18.

The most recent vaccine to lose its authorisation was last Last week the UK Medicines  and Healthcare Products regulatory Agency withdrewrequired recall of a batch of GlaxoSmithKline’s Hepatitis B Engerix Bvaccine marketing authorisation with Professor Kent Woods, chief executive of the MHRA stating:-

The safety of the vaccine is not in question, but it is suspected to be ineffective.” MHRA recalls GSK’s Hepatitis B vaccine – 07 Apr 2009 – Regulatory Affairs – Hays Pharma News

The other most recent vaccine to lose its European marketing authorisation was  Quintanrix [also from GSK] in August last year. The other vaccines are: Infanrix [GSK], Hepacare [Celltech] and Primavax [Aventis Pasteur].

So if ‘The safety of children is always paramount’ why the British Department of Health is even contemplating such a vaccine for 8 week old babies is beyond comprehension.”

And do vaccines cause autistic conditions?  If you read nothing else we strongly recommend you read this: PDF Download – Text of May 5th 2008 email from US HRSA to Sharyl Attkisson of CBS News].  In it the US Health Resources Services Administration [HRSA] state to CBS News reporter Sharyl Attkisson

We have compensated cases in which children exhibited an encephalopathy, or general brain disease. Encephalopathy may be accompanied by a medical progression of an array of symptoms including autistic behavior, autism, or seizures.

After the Hannah  Poling story broke in the USA in February 2008 [see CHS article here] under the media spotlight numerous US health officials and agencies conceded on broadcast US nationwide TV news from CBS and CNN. Full details with links to the original sources can be found in this CHS article: Vaccination Causes Autism – Say US Government & Merck’s Director of Vaccines. Hannah developed an autistic condition after 9 vaccines administered the same day.

But there is worse to come and it shows the UK’s New Labour Government has been irresponsible handing recently from 1st April 2009 legal power to dictate vaccination policy exclusively to the Joint Committee on Vaccination and Immunisation: UK Government Hands Drug Industry Control of Childhood Vaccination.  The JCVI regrettably has a demonstrable track-record of recklessness on safety up to and including the present day, as shown in FOI documents: British Government’s Reckless Disregard for Child Health Safety and UK Government Hands Drug Industry Control of Childhood Vaccination.

The DoH statement published in The Mail on Sunday is also untrue because:-

  • Under the new law The Health Protection (Vaccination) Regulations 2009 which came into effect on 1st April for England only, the Secretary of State has no power on the grounds of safety to refuse to implement or reverse any Joint Committe on Vaccination and Immunisation recommendation
  • the JCVI expressly has no remit to take safety into account in its decision-making
    • [that role is supposedly the MHRA’s but regrettably they seem to rubber stamp a great deal of what the drug industry come up with – as has been shown time and again and not just with vaccines, but drugs like Seroxat – the “anti-depressant” shown not to work compared to placebo in some trials and which causes adolescents to be 3 times more likely to commit suicide in others.]
  • the only consideration the Secretary of State can take into account in rejecting JCVI recommendations is cost-effectiveness – not safety
  • contrary to the UK Department of Health claims, no childhood vaccines used on British children have ever been tested according to the gold standard of evidence – randomised placebo controlled clinical trials.
  • health officials refuse to ensure large scale studies of total health outcomes between vaccinated and unvaccinated individuals are carried out.  These should show differences in overall health between these groups and some medical professionals believe this is because the studies would reveal the unvaccinated are healthier overall and high levels of chronic diseases in vaccinated individuals.
  • there is no clinical benefit to infants from Hepatitis B vaccine but infants are put at risk of the known and unknown adverse effects
  • this also means doctors and nurses are being expected to behave unethically and possibly criminally – because no caring parent will consent to a vaccine administered to an 8 week old baby on being told there are risks but no benefits

The main reason for the new drive to more and more vaccines – and this is well published in the trade press – is that the drug industry has been changing its business model.  The financial markets have known for many years the old model would fail – that of patented “blockbuster” drugs:-

  • the drug industry have made vaccines the new growth area because they are highly lucrative
    • they are drugs everyone gets – it is the same business model of Bill Gates’ Microsoft – pretty much everyone has to have Windows software – pretty much everyone gets vax’d
    • and the drug industry has been working hard behind-the-scenes to pursuade everyone – especially legislators – that they are vital when they are not and lobbying for changes in law just like this new law – which was introduced without Parliamentary debate and appears to be unlawful per se: UK Government Hands Drug Industry Control of  Childhood Vaccination

Dr Marc Girard, a specialist in the side effects of drugs and commissioned as a medical expert by French courts in the French criminal investigation into the introduction of universal Hepatitis B vaccination in France,suggests that even in high-endemic countries, the risk/benefit ratio of what he describes as “this unusually toxic vaccine” must be carefully re-assessed.

Regarding the health situation in the UK Dr Girard says the conclusion not to vaccinate is obvious. France was the first country to implement universal hepatitis B vaccination in 1994.

Whilst other evidence is embargoed by the French Courts, Dr. Marc Girard has also been able to publish a scientific review of the unembargoed evidence of the vaccine’s hazards (Autoimmun Rev 2005; 4: 96-100). Dr Girard shows that French health authorities suppress studies demonstrating serious risks.

Dr Girard has previously said:

Whilst the risk factors for babies have changed little, there is now impressive evidence that for a preventive measure, hepatitis B vaccine is remarkable for the frequency, variety and severity of complications from its use. The toxicity of this vaccine is so unusual that, even if crucial data are regrettably concealed or covered by Court order, scientific evidence is already far higher than normally needed to justify severe restrictive measures.

______________________________________

REFERENCES

UK & EU MARKETING AUTHORISATION WITHDRAWALS

  • MHRA recalls GSK’s Hepatitis B vaccine – 07 Apr 2009 – Regulatory Affairs – Hays Pharma News
  • Public Statement on Quintanrix (Common name: diphtheria, tetanus, pertussis, hepatitis B, Haemophilus influenzae type b conjugate vaccine) Withdrawal of the Marketing Authorisation in the European Union – 29/08/08 –EMEA/424484/08
  • EMEA announces recommendation for suspension of the marketing authorisation for Hexavac – EMEA/297369/2005
    • EMEA Questions and Answers on the suspension ofHexavac –  EMEA/304888/2005
  • EMEA Withdrawal of the Marketing Authorisation for the Medicinal Product Hepacare (Triple hepatitis B recombinant vaccine)EMEA/32933/02– 20/12/02
    • Public Statement on Hepacare (Triple hepatitis B recombinant vaccine)17/12/02 – EMEA/32933/02
  • Withdrawal of the Marketing Authorisation for the Medicinal ProductPrimavax (Diptheria, Tetanus, and Hepatitis B vaccine) – 04/12/00 – EMEA/H/2681/00

______________________________________

DEATHS, MULTIPLE SCLEROSIS AND OTHER ADVERSE EFFECTS

  • “Unexplained cases of sudden infant death shortly after hexavalent vaccination.” Zinka B, Rauch E, Buettner A, Rueff F, Penning R. – Vaccine. 2005 May 18

Vaccinations are considered to be the most effective and safe method preventing infectious diseases. Although hexavalent vaccines like Hexavac((R)) and Infanrix Hexa((R)) are assumed to be well tolerated and safe regarding the rate of immunity  [Liese JG, Stojanov S, Berut F, Minini P, Harzer E, Jow S, et al. Large scale safety study of a liquid hexavalent vaccine (D-T-acP-IPV-PRP-T-HBs) administered at 2, 4, 6 and 12-14 months of age. Vaccine 2002;20:448-54; Mallet E, Fabre P, Pines E, Salomon H, Staub T, Schodel F, et al. Immunogenicity and safety of a new liquid hexavalent combines vaccine compared with separate administration of reference licensed vaccines in infants. Pediatr Infect Dis J 2000;19:1119-27], it was noticed that several cases of death occurred shortly after the vaccination. We report six cases of sudden infant death that occurred within 48h after hexavalent vaccination. At post-mortal examination, those cases showed unusual findings, especially in the brain and in laboratory tests. Crude calculations of local epidemiology are compatible with an association between hexavalent vaccination and unusual cases of sudden infant death. If confirmed in systematic studies, our findings would have potentially serious clinical implications.

Neonatal Deaths After Hepatitis B Vaccine – The Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System, 1991-1998 – Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med. 1999;153:1279-1282

Results: Of 1771 neonatal reports, there were 18 deaths in 8 boys and 9 girls (1 patient unclassified). The mean age at vaccination for these 18 cases was 12 days(range, 1-27 days); median time from vaccination to onset of symptoms was 2 days (range, 0-20 days); and median time from symptoms to death was 0 days (range, 0-15 days). The mean birth weight of the neonates (n = 15) was 3034 g (range, 1828-4678 g). The causes of death for the 17 autopsied cases were sudden infant death syndrome for 12, infection for 3, and 1 case each of intracerebral hemorrhage, accidental suffocation, and congenital heart disease. Conclusion: Few neonatal deaths following HepB vaccination have been reported, despite the use of at least 86 million doses of pediatric vaccine given in the United States since 1991. While the limitations of passive surveillance systems do not permit definitive inference, these data suggest that HepB immunization is not causing a clear increase in neonatal deaths.

Recombinant hepatitis B vaccine and the risk of multiple sclerosis

NEUROLOGY 2004;63:838-842

A prospective study

Miguel A. Hernán, MD, DrPH, Susan S. Jick, DSc, Michael J. Olek, DO and Hershel Jick, MD

From the Department of Epidemiology (Dr. Hernán), Harvard School of Public Health, Boston; Boston Collaborative Drug Surveillance Program (Drs. Susan S. Jick and Hershel Jick), Boston University, Lexington, MA; and Department of Neurology (Dr. Olek), College of Medicine, University of California, Irvine.

Background: A potential link between the recombinant hepatitisB vaccine and an increased risk of multiple sclerosis (MS) hasbeen evaluated in several studies, but some of them have substantialmethodologic limitations.

Methods: The authors conducted a nested case-control study withinthe General Practice Research Database (GPRD) in the UnitedKingdom. The authors identified patients who had a first MSdiagnosis recorded in the GPRD between January 1993 and December2000. Cases were patients with a diagnosis of MS confirmed throughexamination of medical records, and with at least 3 years ofcontinuous recording in the GPRD before their date of firstsymptoms (index date). Up to 10 controls per case were randomlyselected, matched on age, sex, practice, and date of joiningthe practice. Information on receipt of immunizations was obtainedfrom the computer records.

Results: The analyses include 163 cases of MS and 1,604 controls.The OR of MS for vaccination within 3 years before the indexdate compared to no vaccination was 3.1 (95% CI 1.5, 6.3). Noincreased risk of MS was associated with tetanus and influenzavaccinations.

Conclusions: These findings are consistent with the hypothesisthat immunization with the recombinant hepatitis B vaccine isassociated with an increased risk of MS, and challenge the ideathat the relation between hepatitis B vaccination and risk ofMS is well understood.

Received March 31, 2004. Accepted in final form May 8, 2004.

“Multiple sclerosis and hepatitis B vaccination: Adding the credibility of molecular biology to an unusual level of clinical and epidemiological evidence” Comenge Y; Girard M (Med Hypotheses, doi 10.1016/j.mehy.2005.08.012)

“Autoimmune hazards of hepatitis B vaccine” Girard M (Autoimmun Rev 2005; 4:96-100) (Text available in electronic form on request.)

______________________________________

Low Prevalence in The UK of Hepatitis B and Infections acquired abroad

The prevalence of hepatitis B infection in adults in England and Wales – Epidemiology and Infection (1999), 122:133-138 Cambridge University Press

Cost effectiveness analyses of alternative hepatitis B vaccination programmes in England and Wales require a robust estimate of the lifetime risk of carriage. To this end, we report the prevalence of infection in 3781 anonymized individuals aged 15–44 years whose sera were submitted in 1996 to 16 microbiology laboratories in England and Wales. One hundred and forty-six individuals (3·9%) were confirmed as anti HBc positive, including 14 chronic carriers (0·37%). The prevalence of infection and carriage was higher in samples collected in London and increased with age. No increased risk of infection was seen in sera from genito-urinary (GUM) clinics. Only 15 sera positive for hepatitis B were also positive for hepatitis C. Our results confirm the low prevalence of hepatitis B in England and Wales, are consistent with previous estimates of carriage and suggest that many infections were acquired while resident outside the UK. Future prevalence studies should determine the country of birth and other risk factors for each individual in order to confirm these findings.  (Accepted September 14 1998)