Friday, 23 October 2009

Spain: Swine Flu Vaccinations to Start in November

Source: Costa Blanca News

By Tom Cain

HEALTH Minister, Trinidad Jiménez, has announced that the programme for administering the AH1N1 anti-viral drug to the part of the population considered to be most at risk will begin in November.

She said the criteria for receiving the vaccination is the same all over the country and the programme will be carried out on the same date.

The health ministry says 40 per cent of the population will be vaccinated. This meansat least 800,000 people living in Alicante Province considered to be at risk could qualify.

The at risk group includes medical staff, pregnant women, people who are chronically ill and children up to the age of 14.

A ministry spokesman said the at risk group would only be amplified if it was vitally necessary and there was agreement at EU level.

Thursday, 22 October 2009

Swine Flu Cases Overestimated?

Source: CBS News

CBS News Exclusive: Study Of State Results Finds H1N1 Not As Prevalent As Feared

By Sharyl Attkisson

(CBS) If you've been diagnosed "probable" or "presumed" 2009 H1N1 or "swine flu" in recent months, you may be surprised to know this: odds are you didn’t have H1N1 flu.

In fact, you probably didn’t have flu at all. That's according to state-by-state test results obtained in a three-month-long CBS News investigation.

The ramifications of this finding are important. According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and Britain's National Health Service, once you have H1N1 flu, you're immune from future outbreaks of the same virus. Those who think they've had H1N1 flu -- but haven't -- might mistakenly presume they're immune. As a result, they might skip taking a vaccine that could help them, and expose themselves to others with H1N1 flu under the mistaken belief they won't catch it. Parents might not keep sick children home from school, mistakenly believing they've already had H1N1 flu.

Why the uncertainty about who has and who hasn't had H1N1 flu?

CBSNews.com report on H1N1

In late July, the CDC abruptly advised states to stop testing for H1N1 flu, and stopped counting individual cases. The rationale given for the CDC guidance to forego testing and tracking individual cases was: why waste resources testing for H1N1 flu when the government has already confirmed there's an epidemic?

Some public health officials privately disagreed with the decision to stop testing and counting, telling CBS News that continued tracking of this new and possibly changing virus was important because H1N1 has a different epidemiology, affects younger people more than seasonal flu and has been shown to have a higher case fatality rate than other flu virus strains.

CBS News learned that the decision to stop counting H1N1 flu cases was made so hastily that states weren't given the opportunity to provide input. Instead, on July 24, the Council for State and Territorial Epidemiologists, CSTE, issued the following notice to state public health officials on behalf of the CDC:

"Attached are the Q&As that will be posted on the CDC website tomorrow explaining why CDC is no longer reporting case counts for novel H1N1. CDC would have liked to have run these by you for input but unfortunately there was not enough time before these needed to be posted (emphasis added)."

On Aug. 4, CBS News asked the CDC for e-mail communications to states and other documents regarding the guidance and its rationale. When CDC did not provide us with the documents, such as state-by-state numbers prior to halting testing and tracking, we filed a Freedom of Information request with the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS). More than two months later, the request has not been fulfilled.
We asked all 50 states for their statistics on state lab-confirmed H1N1 prior to the halt of individual testing and counting in July. The results reveal a pattern that surprised a number of health care professionals we consulted. The vast majority of cases were negative for H1N1 as well as seasonal flu, despite the fact that many states were specifically testing patients deemed to be most likely to have H1N1 flu, based on symptoms and risk factors, such as travel to Mexico.


It’s unknown what patients who tested negative for flu were actually afflicted with since the illness was not otherwise determined. Health experts say it’s assumed the patients had some sort of cold or upper respiratory infection that is just not influenza.

With most cases diagnosed solely on symptoms and risk factors, the H1N1 flu epidemic may seem worse than it is. For example, on Sept. 22, this alarming headline came from Georgetown University in Washington D.C.: "H1N1 Flu Infects Over 250 Georgetown Students."

H1N1 flu can be deadly and an outbreak of 250 students would be an especially troubling cluster. However, the number of sick students came not from lab-confirmed tests but from "estimates" made by counting "students who went to the Student Health Center with flu symptoms, students who called the H1N1 hotline or the Health Center's doctor-on-call, and students who went to the hospital's emergency room."

Without lab testing, it's impossible to know how many of the students actually had H1N1 flu. But the statistical trend indicates it was likely much fewer than 250.

CDC continues to monitor flu in general and H1N1 through "sentinels," which basically act as spot-checks to detect trends around the nation. But at least one state, California, has found value in tracking H1N1 flu in greater detail.

"What we are doing is much more detailed and expensive than what CDC wants," said Dr. Bela Matyas, California's Acting Chief of Emergency Preparedness and Response. "We're gathering data better to answer how severe is the illness. With CDC's fallback position, there are so many uncertainties with who's being counted, it's hard to know how much we're seeing is due to H1N1 flu rather than a mix of influenza diseases generally. We can tell that apart but they can't."

After our conversation with Dr. Matyas, public affairs officials with the California Department of Public Health emphasized to CBS News that they support CDC policy to stop counting individual cases, maintaining that the state has the resources to gather more specific testing data than the CDC.

Because of the uncertainties, the CDC advises even those who were told they had H1N1 to get vaccinated unless they had lab confirmation. "Persons who are uncertain about how they were diagnosed should get the 2009 H1N1 vaccine."

That's unwelcome news for a Marietta, Georgia mom whose two children were diagnosed with "probable" H1N1 flu over the summer. She hoped that would mean they wouldn't need the hastily developed H1N1 flu vaccine. However, since their cases were never confirmed with lab tests, the CDC advises they get the vaccine. "I wish they had tested and that I knew for sure whether they had it. I'm not anxious to give them an experimental vaccine if they don't need it."

Speaking to CBS' "60 Minutes," CDC Director Dr. Frieden said he has confidence that the vaccine will be safe and effective: "We're confident it will be effective we have every reason to believe that it will be safe."

However, the CDC recommendation for those who had "probable" or "presumed" H1N1 flu to go ahead and get vaccinated anyway means the relatively small proportion of those who actually did have H1N1 flu will be getting the vaccine unnecessarily. This exposes them to rare but significant side effects, such as paralysis from Guillain-Barre syndrome.

It also uses up vaccine, which is said to be in short supply. The CDC was hoping to have shipped 40 million doses by the end of October, but only about 30 million doses will be available this month.

The CDC did not response to questions from CBS News for this report.

Monday, 19 October 2009

Media blackout, Pharmaceutical payout and the vaccine illusion

From the moment I read that teenager Natalie Morton died only two hours after receiving the cancer vaccine alarms clanged. But her autopsy reached the news within days informing the public she died of an undiagnosed tumour. This seemed to be very convenient considering the governments have been trying hard to persuade the public that the swine flu vaccine is safe.

There appears to be a blackout in the mainstream media where any truth of the dangers of the vaccine is concerned and this led me to wonder if it’s possible to falsify death certificates.

In the book "Swine Flu Exposed" written by Eleanora I. McBean, Ph.D., N.D. we’re shown that in the past when a death has occurred as a direct result of a vaccine doctors, by their own admission, have indeed falsified death certificates omitting the word vaccine (Chapter 5: Falsified Death Certificates and Medical Records ) to “preserve vaccinations from reproach.” 

As this has happened in the past, then it seems feasible that the same falsification could happen again in this day and age especially when the vaccine is one which the government seems to have a desire to promote.

As already mentioned, there seems to be a blackout of the truth regarding swine flu and cancer vaccines in the mainstream media. British news is certainly driving the "vaccine is safe" line forward with full force and when someone of moral standing does speak out the article vanishes from the internet in a blink of an eye. Take for example:

Dr Harper, a leading expert who developed the cancer vaccine and also involved with the clinical trials of Cervarix said the jab was being “over-marketed” and parents should be properly warned about the potential side effects. She also claimed the jab would do nothing to reduce the rates of cervical cancer in the UK.

Authorities in the UK should be on the alert because its sister vaccine, Gardasil, used in America, has already been associated with 32 deaths, she said.

Her comments follow the death of 14-year-old Natalie Morton, who collapsed an hour after receiving the jab at school last week.

It is highly unusual for a researcher to  publicly criticise a vaccine which they helped get approved.

However, Dr Harper, who has written many of the published medical papers about the jab, is so concerned she decided to speak out.

Dr Harper, of the University of Missouri-Kansas, said she believed the risks – “small but real” – could be worse than the risk of developing cancer itself.

And she claimed: “All this jab will do is prevent girls getting some abnormalities associated with cervical cancer which can be treated. It will not decrease cervical cancer rates at all.

“Parents need to know this and that in a small number of cases there are serious side effects.”

Post mortem results last week blamed Natalie’s death on a rare cancer but Dr Richard Halvorsen, author of The Truth About Vaccines, said: “One minute Natalie is an apparently healthy girl, she has the vaccine and within two hours she is dead.

We are told she had a terrible cancer inside her that killed her but this is implausible.

“If you have cancer you have symptoms. Clearly public health doctors are desperate to turn the debate away from the vaccine as a possible cause.”


But, not surprisingly, the article vanished ....however it can still be read in Google’s Cache although I’m not sure for how long: Jab as deadly as the cancer

Dr Diane Harper has tried to speak out to warn parents but has been met by stonewalling. However,AHRP (Alliance for Human Research Protection) has printed her voice:

"She said that vaccinating little girls now is not going to protect them later. Since it can take a decade or more to even manifest itself as dysplasia, the HPVs against which this vaccine works may infect a little girl at the age she needs the vaccine most - meaning she will have to have a booster at the right point in time or she will not be protected. And, remember, it won't work at all if she was positive for the virus when she was inoculated in the first place.

Merck knows this, Harper said. "To mandate now is simply to Merck's benefit, and only to Merck's benefit," she said.

Dr. Harper said, she's been trying for months to convince major television and print media to listen to her and tell the facts about the usefulness and effectiveness of this vaccine.  "But no one will print it," she said.
Something is very wrong with this commercially driven frenzied marketing which all those who shape public policy and public opinion were caught shilling for Merck.
Independent advocates need to take to the streets to protect our children from irresponsible pharmaceutical companies whose financial largesse buys public officials, government agencies that are supposed to protect us from potentially harmful drugs and vaccines, and the uncritical transcribers of hype in the press!


I’m left wondering that maybe the blackout of truth in the UK will continue until the "time bomb" vaccinations for both the swine flu and cervical cancer finally explode, especially considering the safety net provided for pharmaceutical companies by the government in the form of a document of immunity from legal prosecution should anyone suffer from any side effects.

What a coup it would be for the pharmaceuticals not only to gain millions by the vaccinations but also  medicating the debilitating diseases some people may suffer from the vaccines for the foreseeable future.

And if that wasn’t bad enough, then knowing that Sir Roy Anderson, a scientist who advises the Government on swine flu is a paid director of a drugs firm making hundreds of millions of pounds from the pandemic, is the icing on the cake.

Daily Mail
"Professor Sir Roy Anderson sits on the Scientific Advisory Group for Emergencies (Sage), a 20-strong task force drawing up the action plan for the virus.

Yet he also holds a £116,000-a-year post on the board of GlaxoSmithKline , the company selling swine flu vaccines and anti-virals to the NHS.


The Daily Mail also goes on to explain that because Sir Roy was at the centre of controversy (which he was forced to apologise and pay compensation), "a university inquiry in the wake of the scandal found he was in breach of rules by failing to disclose his business interests as director and shareholder of International Biomedical and Health Sciences Consortium - an Oxford-based biomedical consultancy, which had awarded grants to his research centre."

Sir Roy was forced to resign, although his career soon recovered. He moved to Imperial College within months, was made the Ministry of Defence's chief scientist and, last year, took over as Rector of Imperial College, London where he earns up to £400,000 a year.

He was one of the first UK experts to call the [swine flu] outbreak a pandemic."


Seems to me there are other agenda’s at work behind the vaccinations rather than the protection of the population from the so called swine flu “pandemic.”

The article by a German newspaper Bild reports the shock warning about the safety of the swine flu vaccine and that it contains cancerous cells from animals.

"Lung specialist Wolfgang Wodarg, a German health expert, said that there are many risks associated with the vaccine for the H1N1 virus.

He has grave reservations about the firm Novartis who are developing the vaccine and testing it in Germany. The vaccination is injected “with a very hot needle”, Wodarg said.

The nutrient solution for the vaccine consists of cancerous cells from animals and "we do not know if there could be an allergic reaction"

But more importantly, some people fear that the risk of cancer could be increased by injecting the cells.

The vaccine - as Johannes Löwer, president of the Paul Ehrlich Institute, has pointed out - can also cause worse side effects than the actual swine flu virus.

Wodrag also described people’s fear of the pandemic as an "orchestration": “It is great business for the pharmaceutical industry,” he told the ‘Neuen Presse’.

Swine flu is not very different from normal flu. “On the contrary if you look at the number of cases it is nothing compared to a normal flu outbreak,” he added.


It has to be said that the pharmaceutical companies are the ones to benefit from this so called “pandemic” because going by the risks involved with the vaccinations there certainly doesn't seem to be any benefits for  the population.

Unless the blackout in the mainstream media is lifted and the truth told, how many people will die or be affected with severe side effects by these vaccines? How many of our children will have the word "vaccination" omitted from their death certificates to “preserve vaccinations from reproach?" How many elderly and severely ill will be duped into believing they’re among the “at risk” group and must have the vaccine for their "own safety?" How many of us are going to fall foul to the possible hazardous ingredients because the government has signed a document of immunity from legal prosecution for the pharmaceutical companies who developed the vaccines?

Friday, 16 October 2009

"Primal Mommies" talk about the swine flu vaccine

Perhaps parents would like to visit the"Primal Mommies" blog where they are discussing the swine flu vaccine.

The following article written by Primal (presumably the blog administrator), says it all:

"I’ve been receiving a lot of emails lately asking me my thoughts and experiences on vaccinations. So I’ve decided that I’d write this post for everyone at once.

There are a quite a few reasons not to vaccinate. And none in favor of vaccinating.


Here they are :

1. The majority of SIDS cases are actually vaccine-related deaths which have been “written off” as SIDS. (What damage it would do to their wallets if you were told the truth!) But the fact is that in Japan in the mid-70’s, the laws were changed that children should no longer start vaccinations at the age of 3 months but wait until after 2years. Their rates plummeted! “Delay of DPT immunisation until 2 years of age in Japan has resulted in a dramatic decline in adverse side effects. In the period of 1970-1974, when DPT vaccination was begun at 3 to 5 months of age, the Japanese national compensation system paid out claims for 57 permanent severe damage vaccine cases, and 37 deaths. During the ensuing six year period 1975-1980, when DPT injections were delayed to 24 months of age, severe reactions from the vaccine were reduced to a total of eight with three deaths. This represents an 85 to 90 percent reduction in severe cases of damage and death.” Raymond Obomsawin, M.D.

2. So should you delay? I’d say yes based on these statistics. However, the fact of the matter is that nearly 100% of the children who contract an illness during an outbreak, are the vaccinated. So what does that tell us? It tells us that the vaccinated actually are not immune to these diseases for which they have been vaccinated. Why? It is because vaccinations bypass the body’s normal immuno-defense system.

When your contract a virus naturally, the virus invades your body through mucous membranes (eyes, nose, mouth). This is your body’s alarm system. A message is then sent to your brain and body to fight off the invaders. Your body reacts by producing mass amounts of antibodies. When, however, we vaccinate, that normal system of defense is bypassed completely. Instead of the virus entering through mucous membranes (our alarm system), it is injected directly into the bloodstream. Now the body has no time to react. It bypassed the alarm system and now is attacking in full-force. Not only is your body not producing the antibodies needed but your immune system is actually compromised.

As you can see, the vaccines don’t really immunize at all. Which brings us directly to

3. Low efficacy rate: There are no statistics which support the efficacy of vaccines. No proof, whatsoever, that vaccines ever got rid of anything. In fact, Measles deaths had declined by 99.4% before vaccination!

“Up to 90% of the total decline in the death rate of children between 1860-1965 because of whooping cough, scarlet fever, diptheria, and measles occured before the introduction of immunisations and antibiotics.”—Dr Archie Kalokerinos, M.D.

“There is no convincing scientific evidence that mass inoculations can be credited with eliminating any childhood disease.”–Dr Robert Mendelsohn MD

“It is pathetic and ludicrous to say we ever vanquished smallpox with vaccines, when only 10% of the population was ever vaccinated.” Dr Glen Dettman.


3. Another reason is the ingredients. There are many toxic substances included in the ingredients of vaccines. These include formaldehyde and mercury. Also, vaccines are grown in the cells of monkeys, guinea pigs, and chick embryos. These cells are nourished with blood serum from calves. There is no way to know what diseases these animals may have been carrying. Additional ingredients listed are listed at Dr. Mercola’s site and by typing “vaccine ingredients” in a google search. You’ll be surprised that tissues and blood from other animals that are in vaccines.

4. Increase in disease and disorders. The numbers prove that there has been a dramatic increase in disorders such as Autism, ADHD, and more. The incidence of other disease has risen.

“Vaccination programs were instituted in the late 1930s, and the first handful
of autistic babies were noted in the early 1940s. When vaccination programs were
expanded after the war, the number of autistic children increased greatly.”—Harris
Coulter Ph.D.

I can go on and listing reasons against vaccinations. But I can’t find one reason TO vaccinate. They do not prevent disease; weaken the immune system; cause other disorders; and places toxins into the body. Why put your children through the pain and crying? Your instincts cause you to dread taking your kids in for these shots.. follow those primal intincts. Anything nature intended for them won’t cause pain and tears.

For More Information See:  Alternative Doctor

UK Swine Flu Vaccinations start 21 October 2009

According to the BBC article swine flu vaccinations are starting next week (October 21, 2009). The “priority groups” and “timetable” are as follows:

PRIORITY GROUPS
1. Individuals aged 6 months to 65 years with underlying health problems, such as heart disease, diabetes and asthma
2. Pregnant women
3. Household contacts of people with compromised immune systems
4. Individuals aged over 65 with health problems

VACCINATION TIMETABLE
Hospitals - Vaccination of at-risk patients and frontline health workers to start on 21 October and expected to take between two to three days
GPs - Will start inviting patients to come and get the jab from 26 October, could take more than a month to get everyone in the priority groups vaccinated
Others - Mental health trusts will also receive jabs from 26 October, while local health mangers will coordinate the immunisation of health and social care staff working in the community

The BBC news says:

“There has been some concern about the situation regarding pregnant women as they have not been part of the clinical trial process that has tested the two jabs being used in the UK.”

But then goes onto say that:

“But experts have pointed out that a wealth of data exists on the use of seasonal flu vaccines on pregnant women - they are routinely included in the US programme, while those with health problems get the jab in the UK.”

Yet the H1N1 is supposed be a new strain (novel strain), so how can they say that pregnant women who haven't been part of the clinical trial process for the swine flu vaccine will be okay because pregnant women have had seasonal flu vaccines in the past? Seasonal flu is not the so called swine flu.

Sir Liam explains:

Sir Liam said it was important for pregnant women to be immunised as they have a particularly high risk of complications from swine flu - two pregnant women have died in the past week alone, including a 17-year-old from Scotland.

"The sensible approach to reducing risk is to get the vaccine. It will save lives."


Which is an odd statement to make when it was only in July 2009 Staffnurse.com  reported:

“Sir Liam says pregnant women do not need to cease normal activities. He says most women who catch the virus will make an uncomplicated recovery.”

As clear as mud.

Although the BBC article goes on to inform us that it has not yet been decided whether the rest of the population (presumably those outside of the “priority groups”) will be vaccinated, the government has ordered enough vaccines for the whole population. I guess that means the decision has been made (behind closed doors) after all, otherwise why order enough for the whole population?

Curiously the article also explains that cases of swine flu are rising:

“In total, there were 27,000 new cases in England during the past week, compared with 18,000 the week before. 

Meanwhile, in Scotland, 12,500 people were thought to have contracted swine flu - up from 6,800.
Rises are also being seen in Northern Ireland and Wales.”

But going by what is happening in my area this seems to be unreliable data. So far those around me who have phoned the National Pandemic Flu Service for advice are given a list of symptoms to which they say yes or no. If they have any one of the symptoms from the list then they're classed as having swine flu. The name, date of birth and address of the patient is taken and an authorisation number given to the person who called which can then be taken to any local "antiviral Collection Point" to collect antivirals (Tamiflu). Presumably once an authorisation number has been given then the person is added to the swine flu data.

The problem is that from those who (I know) have phoned the hotline and been "confirmed" as having swine flu, one person had an ear and throat infection while a relative’s son merely had a cold with a temperature. If her son did have swine flu then it’s not as contagious as they’d like us to believe because no one else in the family or those who had been in contact with her son caught the “virus.”

This begs the question: How many of the reported 27,000 new swine flu cases in England and 12,500 in Scotland are actually suffering from minor ailments?

Out of curiosity the relative went to collect Tamiflu for her son. On producing the necessary identification for her son she was initially denied the medication. Why? Because the name of her son didn’t match their records....they had his middle name as his surname. She told me “I didn’t give them my son’s middle name over the phone so where did they get those records from?”

Where indeed. I don’t have the answer to that, but perhaps someone out there does.

Friday, 9 October 2009

Evidence of Harm: David Kirby

David Kirby has been a professional journalist for over 15 years, and has written for The New York Times for the past eight years. .....

....Kirby has also worked in politics, medical research and public relations. He worked for New York City Council President Carol Bellamy as a special assistant for healthcare, cultural affairs and civil rights, followed by employment as chief scheduler to Manhattan Borough President David N. Dinkins. He also was a senior staff adviser to Dinkins’ successful 1989 run for Mayor of New York City. From 1990-1993, Kirby was Director of Public Information at the American Foundation for AIDS Research (AmFAR), where he acted as press spokesman for Chairwoman Elizabeth Taylor, and witnessed first-hand the inner workings of Congress, the White House and powerful Federal agencies like the FDA, CDC and NIH. Kirby also ran his own public relations agency in New York for four years, from 1993 through 1996, with clients that included the National Cancer Institute, AmFAR, ABC, BBC, Absolut Vodka, Dean Witter Discover & Co., and others.

Read David Kirby's full bio

The following article (written in 2006) by  Vaccination News

For Immediate Release – March 28, 2006
CONTACT: Elizabeth Coxe, St. Martin’s Press -- 646-307-5563

EVIDENCE OF HARM RECEIVES INVESTIGATIVE
REPORTERS AND EDITORS AWARD
Author David Kirby is cited for “careful and meticulous reporting” in his book on thimerosal and autism
................

NEW YORK, March 28, 2006 – “Evidence of Harm – Mercury in Vaccines and the Autism Epidemic” (St. Martin’s Press – Paperback edition March, 2006) has been awarded the “Investigative Reporters and Editors 2005 Award for Outstanding Investigative Reporting in a Book,” the organization announced today.

“I am honored to be recognized by such a prestigious jury of my peers,” Kirby said. “I hope this award will inspire other investigative writers to follow their leads and their hunches, and to report on all controversial topics that warrant a closer look. Thankfully, freedom of the press survives in America.”

In their comments, award judges – comprised of some of the most experienced investigative journalists in the country – noted that, “Kirby told the story of stonewalling, denial and cover-up by federal regulators, medical groups and the pharmaceutical industry.” And, they added, “He documents covert efforts by some of those same powerful forces - along with the U.S. Congress - to grant blanket immunity for drug companies that put mercury in vaccines.”

“Like so many scientific controversies involving complex science and big business, the topic is controversial. Kirby's careful and meticulous reporting is exemplary in its balance, accuracy and documentation,” the judges said.

IRE, founded in 1975, is a nonprofit professional organization dedicated to training and supporting journalists who pursue investigative stories and operates the National Institute for Computer-Assisted Reporting, a joint program of IRE and the Missouri School of Journalism. IRE Awards will be presented during the Saturday, June 17, luncheon at the 2006 IRE Annual Conference in Fort Worth. More information on IRE and the awards can be found at http://www.ire.org/contest/05winners.html.

“Evidence of Harm” is also a finalist for the The New York Public Library Helen Bernstein Book Award for Excellence in Journalism. The winner will be announced at a special luncheon at the Library on May 10, 2006.

For more information, please visit "Evidence of Harm" website.

"Evidence of Harm" by David Kirby is available from:
Amazon.co.uk  (UK)
Ebay.co.uk  (UK)
Amazon.com  (USA)
Ebay.com (USA)

Thursday, 8 October 2009

Brain damage follows HPV vaccination in UK

By the ANH Team 

The UK's Daily Mail reported as follows  5th October:

Teenage girl left brain-damaged  after receiving cervical cancer jab

A teenage girl has been left brain-damaged after suffering epileptic seizures just days after being given the controversial cervical cancer jab.

Stacey Jones, 18, suffered her first seizure in March when she was 17, days after she had the Cervarix injection.

In the following weeks she had several more fits, causing such severe brain injury that she had to be admitted to a rehabilitation unit, where she is relearning simple tasks.

Stacey Jones (centre) pictured with her cousins at her 18th birthday party started to suffer epileptic seizures just days after having the cancer jab.

According to the Sunday Telegraph, the parents of the teenager, from Bilston in the West Midlands, are convinced that the vaccination caused swelling in the brain.

The swelling has been diagnosed as the cause of Stacey's neurological problems.

Mother, Julie Jones, 44, told the newspaper: 'She was such a lovely, happy-go-lucky girl, now she is just a shell.

'I really feel she has been used as a guinea pig.

'I don't think there is enough evidence that the vaccination programme is safe - this all happened days after Stacey was given the vaccine, and we don't have any other explanation for what triggered her brain injury.'

Read more.


ANH Comment:

How does one measure safety in view of mounting evidence of injuries and death following vaccination?

Apart from the case of Stacey Jones, reported above, we’ve had the recent case of Natalie Morton, but of course it seems the coroner has gone a long way to suggest that Natalie’s death just 2 hours after the vaccination was coincidental.

Then we have 13-year-old Rebecca Ramagge, who has suffered  increasingly debilitating joint pain, muscle weakness and fatigue following each of three HPV vaccines, in September 2008, November 2008 and March 2009 respectively.

What of Lisa Wickenden, another 13-year-old from Surrey? She developed muscle weakness following the jab and her GP told her the problem was in her mind. He referred her to a consultant psychiatrist. The psychiatrist informed her that her mental health was sound and indicated, according to the Sunday Express  newspaper,  that her symptoms had “a strong relationship to receiving the vaccine.”

And what about Carly Steel? Read more.

See also recent ANH news item  about Ashleigh Cave.

Follow the money

Many critics of governments' over-dependence on pharmaceuticals and vaccines urge that we take a closer look at how the money moves. One interesting perspective on this was published by LifeSiteNews.com   in September 2007, as the HPV vaccination program began in Canada.

Bottom line

There is a pattern emerging which is very hard to ignore. It seems the HPV vaccine has the ability to trigger severe adverse reactions, which may lead to permanent debilitation or death, but that such events are rare. They are also seemingly unpredictable.

This view is of course not just our own, but has been made forcefully by Dr Diane Harper from the University of Missouri. Dr Harper is one of the foremost experts in the HPV vaccine, and a scientist who was directly involved in the clinical trials of HPV vaccines.

Read an article in US News on Dr Harper’s view on Merck’s Gardasil vaccine, a close relative of GSK’s Cervarix as used in the UK, from March 2009.

Let’s not forget, the official US government figures on Gardasil in the US, suggest that as many as 7% of adverse effects from Gardasil have involved hospitalization, permanent disability, life-threatening illness or death.

But, despite all of this, the recently updated National Health Service (NHS) website tells us that we should rest easy and continue the HPV vaccination of our children as per usual—because Natalie Morton's sudden death was caused by a tumour, according to the pathologist involved in the post mortem. The vaccine, said the coroner, played no contributory role. Read  the NHS view on this.

Perhaps the real question should have been: how qualified and experienced are pathologists in determining the rapid response of the human inflammatory system to vaccinations? Don’t they spend most of their time working with dead bodies?

This head in the sand approach from government authorities and the drug companies is reminiscent of the tobacco/lung cancer debacle that ensued during the 1970s and 1980s.

It seems it’s not so difficult to continue to declare your vaccine safe, as long as you continue to avoid linking any of the deaths or side effects to the vaccine itself. The difficulty of proving a causal association between smoking and cancer is precisely why it took decades for the associations to be recognized by governments. With the HPV vaccine, the situation is tougher still, as the adverse effects are indeed considerably more rare.

Are you prepared to allow your daughter to be a guinea pig in what Dr Harper has described as a 'mass experiment'?  Or perhaps you feel that protecting your daughter (but for how long?) from the two common strains of the human papilloma virus (HPV) that result in around 70% of cervical cancers in women makes the risk one worth taking?

In any event, the public need accurate and transparent information about what the actual risks are — and it is apparent that governments and vaccine manufacturers are giving us a picture that is a likely distortion of what is actually already known.

Friday, 2 October 2009

Wondering whether Swine Flu Vaccine is a good idea? Watch this video

Source: Swine Flu 1976 Propaganda
by Dianequiose-4

If I had  any slim doubts that the Swine Flu "pandemic" isn't government propaganda then I certainly don't now after watching this video.... I'd like to share this short documentary with you all too. If you'd also like to place it on your blog or website click on the menu button and select "URL and Embed Mode."

The 1976 Swine Flu vaccines contained known toxins even then and yet the government failed to inform the people of that fact....sadly for those who suffered serious side effects from the vaccine (paralysis) because they believed in the government propaganda and duly lined up for their shots.

If they hid the truth in 1976 then are they repeating it now? After being sued in the 70's it would certainly explain why the manufacturers of the vaccines have been granted immunity from prosecution this time.

Another fact the video reports is there was NO pandemic even though the government and health organisations led the people to believe there was....they were merely trying to scare people into taking the vaccine and sadly it worked.



Thursday, 1 October 2009

Why do the governments want pregnant women vaccinated? And other questions

During my pregnancies (as with all pregnant women) the one thing that’s most important is ensuring the health and protection of my unborn child, trying to eat the right things and that no drugs enter my system which may harm my baby. Even headache tablets came under scrutiny: Is it safe to take?

Is it safe? Think of those words....is it safe? It’s never felt right with me that pregnant women should be in line for the Swine Flu vaccine, even more worrying when I found it contained mercury which may pool in the base of the brain and cause untold devastating side-effects, then to find other ingredients that are potentially dangerous, not only to mother but to her unborn baby, too is just too frightening for words.

A leaked letter from the government to senior neurologists which "warns the new swine flu jab is linked to a deadly nerve disease (Guillain-Barre Syndrome)  and tells them they must to be alert for an increase in brain disorder"....not suggesting they defer or hold off the vaccine in anyway but to proceed and merely be on the lookout. How irresponsible! Or perhaps this is exactly what the government wants?

But back to my main point: Why would anyone want to inject toxins into pregnant women? Why have the manufacturers of these vaccines been given immunity from the government should things go wrong?

While searching for the ingredients of cancer vaccine I came across a rather disturbing article with regard other ingredients of the Swine Flu vaccine and which may in fact answers my questions....

The following article’s been taken from "Bloody British Government" blog. For the answer to the question "why do they want pregnant women to be vaccinated" please pay special attention to the ingredient “Polysorbate 80: Also known as Tween 80.” That ingredient isn’t only in the Swine Flu vaccine but also the cancer vaccine currently being given to girls too. I’m slowly forming a picture that there’s something very damning about this whole swine flu and cancer vaccine project and it has nothing to do with saving the world from the so called Swine Flu or cervical cancer.

WHY should the government suggest pregnant women should be one of the first to receive the vaccine when experts have already said they do not how the vaccine will affect the foetus? This statement from the experts is hardly surprising when you realise Tween 80 one of the vaccine components is know to cause infertility as well as spontaneous abortions.

Are the advocates of this vaccine aware of the toxic chemical components?

If they are not then they are the best irresponsible and at the worst highly negligent. Maybe vaccine supporters should spend some time checking out just what concoction they are allowing into their children’s bodies.

The following is an incomplete (but significant) list of vaccine ingredients: Obtained from GS in London’s own patent.

GlaxoSmithKline Plc based in London Vaccine Ingredients: obtained from GS patent.

Aluminum adjuvant: an aluminum-containing compound. It releases the antigen [an active substance that is capable of generating an enhanced immune response from the body, and then reacting with the products from that response], causing strong, enhanced antibody response ¬what Dr. Mercola calls a “turbo charge” to the body’s immune system. It has been linked to Gulf War Syndrome that has caused tremendous permanent damage to thousands of military.(7) Aluminum is a known cause of cognitive dysfunction.

AS03: The company’s proprietary squalene adjuvant. (See: squalene below)

Daronrix: Glaxo’s H5N1 bird flu vaccine.

Disodium phosphate: a white powder, water-soluble salt. It is used as an anti-caking additive in powdered products. This inorganic chemical is also used as a fungicide and microbiocide.

Formaldehyde: a known carcinogen and reproductive or developmental toxicant. Interestingly, according to PANNA, in 2007, California used 30,328 pounds of this carcinogen, as a microbiocide [a drug or other agent that can kill microbes] on the top 50 crops grown in the state.(8)

Octoxynol 10: (Also known as Triton X-100) A detergent, emulsifier, wetting and defoaming agent. [Octoxynol-9 is a spermatocide.] It can alter metabolic activity, damage membranes, and cause a rapid decline in cell function.

Polysorbate 80: Also known as Tween 80. It is used as an emulsifier in cosmetics, and is one of the ingredients in Gardasil, the cervical cancer vaccine that is being mandated/promoted for teen-age girls. This ingredient is known to cause infertility, grand mal convulsions, spontaneous abortions, and life-threatening anaphylactic shock. So far, 28 Gardasil deaths have been reported.

Sodium Chloride: Refined table salt. Salt is a naturally occurring complex mineral that balances the water inside and outside our cells. Refined salt, sodium chloride, is chemically treated and contains many other hidden chemicals that destroy natural salt’s healing abilities. The body can get most of its daily requirement by eating a well-balanced, organic diet –eliminating processed foods. A good source is untreated, natural sea salt.

Squalene: A natural oil found in sharks (mostly found in their livers) and humans. The American Journal of Pathology (2000) reported that rats injected with squalene triggered “chronic, immune-mediated joint-specific inflammation,” ¬i.e., rheumatoid arthritis. How will this affect people who already have an immune inflammation, or will it cause untold new cases (lupus, chronic fatigue)? Squalene is being added to all new vaccines. It is linked to the thousands of military who have contracted “Gulf War Syndrome” and have suffered irreparable auto-immune damage, including lupis, multiple sclerosis, fibromyalgia, and rheumatoid arthritis.(9)

Thimersol: (MERCURY). Put in all multiple doses of vaccines. Any amount of mercury is highly toxic. There is no safe level. This is has been repeatedly linked to the increasing rates of autism, multiple sclerosis, and ADD.(10)

Vitamin E: This anti-oxidant vitamin helps protect the body’s red blood cell functions, and helps to oxygenate our tissues. The best sources are from organic, cold-pressed vegetable oils, such as wheat germ, sunflower seeds, and safflower. Vitamin E from corn or soybean oil now often comes from genetically engineered sources.

1. As Polysorbate 80 (aka: Tween 80) is known to cause infertility and is in both the swine flu and cancer vaccinations then teenage girls are getting a double dose (no room for any slipping through the net it seems). Are we heading towards a world of infertility? (If you haven’t seen the film "Children of Men"  now may be a good time to view it)

2. As Polysorbate 80 is also linked to spontaneous abortions, why would any government want to administer the vaccine to pregnant women?

3. Most of the ingredients of the vaccine seem designed to trigger a variety of diseases, some fatal. Why?

4. Manufacturers granted immunity should things go drastically wrong. Why?

5. Heart disease kills more women each year than cancer, accidents, and diabetes combined, so why the sudden urgency to confront cervical cancer and vaccinate school girls?

6. And now there’s plans to "Give Gardasil to boys too say experts"  (Can’t have the boys missing out on becoming infertile too...)

7. More people die from seasonal flu than the so called swine flu, so why the urgency to get these vaccines out to as many people as they possibly can and even considering mandatory vaccinations (already started in some countries and states of America) when in truth there’s no real threat from swine flu?

Line the pockets of the manufacturers or mass genocide and depopulation of the world? I dislike sounding like a conspiracy theorist but the ingredients of the vaccines certainly seems as if they’re planning on wiping us out in one form or another.