Print

Print


People argue in length and ask questions that were actually all addressed in many articles and videos I sent before at various times.

The biggest problem about mandatory vaccines in my mind is that you can’t trust the government to force injections on people – on Jan 23 this year I sent details of how an Italian lab demonstrated that the vaccine samples they analyzed turned out to be some SCARY MYSTERY SHOT!

In the same email, I also gave info on 2016 US law that allows the government to legally force drugs and "medical devices" (think microchips, nano-dust/smart-dust) WITHOUT INFORMED CONSENT.  What’s the implication of this law in combination with mandatory vaccination?

That email also contained loads of other important info, that I highly urge people to read.  If you don't find it in your email, please read it on the list archive:

https://list.uvm.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A2=ind1901&L=SCIENCE-FOR-THE-PEOPLE&P=33900

I previously also sent evidence of how antigens from human pregnancy hormone were spiked into the tetanus vaccines given to women & girls specifically of child-bearing age, in a number of third world countries (that we know of).  And yes, Bill Gates’ foundation has been at the forefront of promoting these antifertility tetanus shots, specially for girls, using WHO programs.

Autism.  The authors who wrote the paper that supposedly discredited Wakefield on vaccine-autism link, one of them subsequently became a whistleblower, admitting how they cherrypicked and manipulated data, because otherwise their large dataset would have validated Wakefield’s conclusions.  I sent link to that before.

A government expert publicly testified that vaccines DON'T cause autism—then privately told DOJ lawyers that they CAN, and DO, cause autism. They promptly fired him (in 2007) as their expert witness, and continued to use his old testimony to claim vaccines DON'T cause autism.  http://fullmeasure.news/news/cover-story/the-vaccination-debate

And no, it’s not just due to improved diagnosis.  Now it seems every elementary class has at least one obviously autistic child.  It didn’t use to be like that.

Do vaccines save lives?  We’ve been taught that it’s the vaccines that prevented many childhood deaths and disabilities when they were introduced.  But they achieve such statistic by showing ONLY the history starting just before the vaccine introduction.  When the view is extended to begin from early 20th century, then it’s clear the DEATH RATES of all these childhood diseases’ were steadily dropping PRIOR TO the vaccines, due to improvements in hygiene, nutrition, and cleaner drinking water, etc.  See two charts I just grabbed from the internet, but they’re in more authoritative publications too:

https://yuzustudios.com/a/vaccination-liberation-information-yufl435-4304.html

http://barbshealthblog.blogspot.com/2017/02/some-facts-about-polio-that-cdc-wishes.html

A review article in the journal Pediatrics from 2000, titled: Annual Summary of Vital Statistics: Trends in the Health of Americans During the 20th Century, concludes: “Thus vaccination does not account for the impressive declines in mortality seen in the first half of the century.” (p. 1315)

But vaccines did dramatically reduce the INCIDENCE of childhood infectious diseases.  The problem is, is that necessarily a good thing?  Leaving aside all the dangers posed by adjuvants, preservatives, contaminant genetic material from organisms used for vaccine preparation (including their viruses), etc etc., serious questions are raised about the problematic paradigm of overstimulating the antibody pathway (as opposed to the cellular pathway) of immunity during infant stage when nature seems to intend the child's own antibody pathway to remain dormant while the body learns to distinguish self from others, and threats from non-threats.

Additionally, scientists are just now discovering that some common childhood diseases, having co-evolved with humans over eons, while posing some threat to an otherwise unhealthy child, is also actually helping to reduce future serious illnesses such as cancer, so they may well have a positive role in our biology.
 

Maggie

 

 


On Wednesday, March 13, 2019, 5:00:28 AM GMT+1, SCIENCE-FOR-THE-PEOPLE automatic digest system <[log in to unmask]> wrote:


SCIENCE-FOR-THE-PEOPLE Digest - 11 Mar 2019 to 12 Mar 2019 (#2019-57)
LISTSERV mailing list manager LISTSERV 16.0  

SCIENCE-FOR-THE-PEOPLE Digest - 11 Mar 2019 to 12 Mar 2019 (#2019-57)

Table of contents:

  1. Bill Gates on Vaccines & population control
  2. Evidence and science that support vaccine exemptions
  3. Help build our People’s Green New Deal campaign
  4. Revamping science: Making room for more voices

Browse the SCIENCE-FOR-THE-PEOPLE online archives.

Powered by the LISTSERV Email List Manager

I was wondering what people here think of this TED speech by Bill Gates, in which he lauds new vaccines for population control ....


The Fight Against Monsanto's Roundup: The Politics of Pesticides (SkyHorse, 2019), authored by Mitchel Cohen, is now available at bookstores everywhere! Please click on link to learn more.

Forgot the link: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4vzFeiKH1jQ

At 01:31 AM 3/12/2019, you wrote:
I was wondering what people here think of this TED speech by Bill Gates, in which he lauds new vaccines for population control ....

The Fight Against Monsanto's Roundup: The Politics of Pesticides (SkyHorse, 2019), authored by Mitchel Cohen, is now available at bookstores everywhere! Please click on link to learn more.

Here's some robust evidence (only 30 percent or so of what has been gathered):

This is all of the research on vaccinations. ALL OF THESE STUDIES ARE PUBLISHED, LEGITIMATE STUDIES ON PUBMED which is a government database.

Vaccines and Autism

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3878266/
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21623535
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25377033
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24995277
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12145534
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21058170
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22099159
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3364648/
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17454560
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19106436
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3774468/
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3697751/
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21299355
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21907498
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11339848
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17674242
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21993250
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15780490
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12933322
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16870260

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19043938

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12142947

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24675092



Causal relationship between vaccine induced immunity and autism

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12849883



Subtle DNA changes and the overuse of vaccines in autism
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3364648/



Vaccine and Autism- a New Scientific Review
http://www.cbsnews.com/news/vaccines-and-autism-a-new-scientific-review/



Summary of previous Journal of Immunology
http://danmurphydc.com/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2011/01/AR-10-12-rata-AUTISM-VACCINE.pdf



Autism and Resulting Medical Conditions:
http://www.tacanow.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/09/autism-studies-april-2008.pdf



Mercury toxic encephalopathy manifesting with clinical symptoms of regressive autistic disorders.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17454560



Relation of mercury to high autism rates in boys
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16264412



Elevated levels of measles in children with Autism
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12849883



Abnormal MMR antibodies in children with autism
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12145534



Tylenol, MMR and Autism - A parent survey study
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18445737



A Positive Association found between Autism Prevalence and Childhood Vaccination
http://www.ingentaconnect.com/content/tandf/uteh/2011/00000074/00000014/art00002?token=004c170388ee06a6e5865462431636f5720415d23763c247b5e4e26634a492f2530332976261



Peer reviewed study on fetal cell contamination with retro virus associated with autism and cancer
http://www.globalresearch.ca/new-study-in-journal-of-public-health-finds-autism-and-cancer-related-to-human-fetal-dna-in-vaccines/5402912



Study documentation- Dr Deisher
http://www.ms.academicjournals.org/article/article1409245960_Deisher%20et%20al.pdf



Autism and mercury poisoning
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11339848



Hypothesis: conjugate vaccines may predispose children to autism spectrum disorders
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21993250



Rise in autism coincides with rise in vaccines
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21623535



A two-phase study evaluating the relationship between Thimerosal-containing vaccine administration and the risk for an autism spectrum disorder diagnosis in the United States
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3878266/


Elevated levels of measles antibodies in children with autism. - PubMed - NCBI
Pediatr Neurol. 2003 Apr;28(4):292-4. Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov


••••••••••••••••
A study published in the Journal of Biomedical Sciences determined that the autoimmunity to the central nervous system may play a causal role in autism. Researchers discovered that because many autistic children harbour elevated levels of measles antibodies, they should conduct a serological study of measles-mumps-rubella (MMR) and myelin basic protein (MBP) autoantibodies. They used serum samples of 125 autistic children and 92 controlled children. Their analysis showed a significant increase in the level of MMR antibodies in autistic children. The study concludes that the autistic children had an inappropriate or abnormal antibody response to MMR. The study determined that autism could be a result from an atypical measles infection that produces neurological symptoms in some children. The source of this virus could be a variant of MV, or it could be the MMR vaccine.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12145534


•••••••••••••••••••

https://www.thefamilythathealstogether.com/vaccine-contraindications-six-people-not-vaccinated/

    Lawsuit determines that federally required safety studies have not been performed in 30 years:

http://icandecide.org/government/ICAN-HHS-Stipulated-Order-July-2018.pdf

Fetal Cells & Vaccine Contaminates-

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/m/pubmed/25803132/

    Ethics behind WALVAX2:

http://ethicalresearch.net/positions/the-ethics-of-the-walvax-2-cell-strain/

    PBS on how vital fetal cells are for vaccine development:

https://www.pbs.org/newshour/health/medical-researchers-say-fetal-tissue-remains-essential

Vaccine Failure & Shedding-

https://www.npr.org/sections/goatsandsoda/2017/06/28/534403083/mutant-strains-of-polio-vaccine-now-cause-more-paralysis-than-wild-polio

    Polio vaccine causing polio again:

https://www.cnn.com/2018/06/26/health/polio-papua-new-guinea-bn/index.html

    Polio vaccine contaminated with HFM virus:

Herd Immunity
http://www.vaccinationcouncil.org/2012/02/18/the-deadly-impossibility-of-herd-immunity-through-vaccination-by-dr-russell-blaylock/

The term, ‘herd immunity’, was coined by researcher, A W Hedrich, after he’d studied the epidemiology of measles in USA between 1900-1931. His study published in the May, 1933 American Journal of Epidemiology concluded that when 68% of children younger than 15 yrs old had become immune to measles via infection, measles epidemics ceased. For several reasons, this natural, pre-vaccine herd immunity differed greatly from today’s vaccine ‘herd immunity’.1,2

When immunity was derived from natural infection, a much smaller proportion of the population needed to become immune to show the herd effect; compare the 68% measles immunity required for natural herd immunity to the very high percentages of vaccine uptake deemed necessary for measles vaccine ‘herd immunity’. In his ‘Vaccine Safety Manual’, Neil Z Miller cites research which concluded increasing vaccine uptake necessary for ‘herd immunity’ ranging from “70 to 80 percent of two year olds in inner cities” in 1991 to “‘close to 100 percent coverage’…with a vaccine that is 90 to 98 percent effective.” in 1997. Miller notes that, “When the measles vaccine was introduced in 1963, officials were confident that they could eradicate the disease by 1967.”

Subsequently, new dates for eradication were pronounced as 1982, 2000 and 2010. Meanwhile, “In 1990, after examining 320 scientific works from around the world, 180 European medical doctors concluded that ‘the eradication of measles…would today appear to be an unrealistic goal.’” And in 1984, Professor D. Levy of Johns Hopkins University had already “concluded that if current practices [of suppressing natural immunity] continue, by the year 2050 a large part of the population will be at risk and ‘there could in theory be over 25,000 fatal cases of measles in the U.S.A.’”

Disease-conferred immunity usually lasted a lifetime. As each new generation of children contracted the infection, the immunity of those previously infected was renewed due to their continual cyclical re-exposure to the disease; except for newly-infected children and the few individuals who’d never had the disease or been exposed to it, the ‘herd immunity’ of the entire population was maintained at all times.

Vaccine ‘herd immunity’ is hit-and-miss; outbreaks of disease sometimes erupt in those who follow recommended vaccine schedules. If they do actually “immunize”, vaccines provide only short-term immunity so, in an attempt to maintain ‘herd immunity’, health authorities hold ‘cattle drives’ to round up older members of the ‘herd’ for administration of booster shots. And on it goes, to the point that, now, it’s recommended we accept cradle-to-grave shots of vaccine against pertussis, a disease which still persists after more than sixty years of widespread use of the vaccine.

Russell Blaylock, MD remarks, “One of the grand lies of the vaccine program is the concept of “herd immunity”. In fact, vaccines for most Americans declined to non-protective levels within 5 to 10 years of the vaccines. This means that for the vast majority of Americans, as well as others in the developed world, herd immunity doesn’t exist and hasn’t for over 60 years.”3

In the pre-vaccine era, newborns could receive antibodies against infectious diseases from their mothers who had themselves been infected as children and re-exposed to the diseases later in life. Today’s babies born to mothers who were vaccinated and never exposed to these diseases do not receive these antibodies. In direct contrast to fear mongering disease “facts” and ‘herd immunity’ theories related by Public Health, most of today’s babies are more vulnerable than babies of the pre-vaccine era.

References:
1. “Monthly estimates of the child population ‘susceptible’ to measles, 1900-1931, Baltimore, Maryland”; A W Hedrich; American Journal of Epidemiology; May 1933 – Oxford University Press.

2. ‘Vaccine Safety Manual’ by Neil Z Miller; New Atlantean Press; 2008, 2009; pg 152.

3. Ibid; pgs 16-17.

https://www.facebook.com/axshlexy/posts/10154130529699126

"Q: Doesn't herd immunity protect most people?

A: Herd immunity (or community immunity) is a situation in which, through vaccination or prior illness, a sufficient proportion of a population is immune to an infectious disease, making its spread from person to person unlikely. Even individuals not vaccinated (such as newborns and those with chronic illnesses) are typically protected because the disease has little opportunity to spread within their community. Since pertussis spreads so easily, vaccine protection decreases over time, and acellular pertussis vaccines may not prevent colonization (carrying the bacteria in your body without getting sick) or spread of the bacteria, we can't rely on herd immunity to protect people from pertussis." < https://www.cdc.gov/pertussis/about/faqs.html#increasing >


Questions to ask your doctor/ped regarding vaccinations:


Question-1: If measles vaccines confer measles immunity, then why do already-vaccinated children have anything to fear from a measles outbreak?

Question-2: If vaccines work so well, then why did Merck virologists file a False Claims Act with the U.S. government, describing the astonishing scientific fraud of how Merck faked its vaccine results to trick the FDA?

Question-3: If vaccines don’t have any links to autism, then why did a top CDC scientist openly confess to the CDC committing scientific fraud by selectively omitting clinical trial data after the fact in order to obscure an existing link between vaccines and autism?

Question-4: If mercury is a neurotoxic chemical, then why is it still being injected into children and pregnant women via vaccines? Why does the vaccine industry refuse to remove all the mercury from vaccines in the interests of protecting children from mercury?

Question-5: If vaccines are so incredibly safe, then why does the vaccine industry need absolute legal immunity from all harm caused by its products?

Question-6: If vaccines work so well to prevent disease, then why do some vaccines (like the chickenpox vaccine) openly admit that they can cause the spread of chickenpox?

Question-7: If vaccines are so great for public health, then why do these historical public health charts show nearly all the declines in infectious disease taking place BEFORE vaccines arrived on the scene?

Question-8: If vaccines are perfectly safe, then why did at least 13 people recently die in Italy after being vaccinated?

Question-9: If vaccines are so trustworthy, then why did a pro-vaccine group in Africa recently discover ­ to its shock and horror ­ that vaccines being given to young African women were secretly laced with abortion chemicals?

Question-10: If vaccines are backed by solid science, then why do some vaccine inserts openly admit they are backed by no clinical trials?

Question-11: If vaccines are so safe, then why does this vaccine insert admit that the Gardasil vaccine causes “acute respiratory illness” in babies who consume the breast milk of mothers who have been vaccinated?

Question-12: If vaccines are so safe, then why does this Gardasil insert sheet admit that the vaccine causes “seizure-like activity, headache, fever, nausea and dizziness” and can even cause those injected with the vaccine to lose consciousness and fall, resulting in injury?

Question-13: If vaccines are backed by so much “science” then why do they frequently admit there really aren’t any studies of the vaccine for the very groups of people who are often injected with it?

Question-14: If vaccines are so safe to give to pregnant women, then why do the vaccine insert sheets openly admit most of them have never been tested for safety in pregnant women? In fact, this vaccine admits “the effects of the vaccine in foetal development are unknown.”Question-15: If vaccines are so safe to be injected into the bodies of children and pregnant women, then why do their own insert sheets readily admit they are manufactured with a cocktail of toxic chemical ingredients including “foetal bovine serum?” (The blood serum of aborted baby cows.)

Question-16: If vaccines achieve absolute immunity, then why are as many as 97 percent of children struck by infectious disease already vaccinated against that disease?

Question-17: If vaccines are totally safe and effective, then why did this five-year-old girl recently die from the very strain of flu she was just vaccinated against?

Question-18: If the mainstream media claims to report honest, unbiased information about vaccines, then why was there a total nationwide blackout on the news of the CDC whistle-blower admitting vaccines are linked to autism?


Doctors who explain clearly why vaccines aren't safe or effective.
1. Dr. Nancy Banks - http://bit.ly/1Ip0aIm


2. Dr. Russell Blaylock - http://bit.ly/1BXxQZL


3. Dr. Shiv Chopra - http://bit.ly/1gdgh1s


4. Dr. Sherri Tenpenny - http://bit.ly/1MPVbjx


5. Dr. Suzanne Humphries - http://bit.ly/17sKDbf


6. Dr. Larry Palevsky - http://bit.ly/1LLEjf6


7. Dr. Toni Bark - http://bit.ly/1CYM9RB


8. Dr. Andrew Wakefield - http://bit.ly/1MuyNzo


9. Dr. Meryl Nass - http://bit.ly/1DGzJsc


10. Dr. Raymond Obomsawin - http://bit.ly/1G9ZXYl


11. Dr. Ghislaine Lanctot - http://bit.ly/1MrVeUL


12. Dr. Robert Rowen - http://bit.ly/1SIELeF


13. Dr. David Ayoub - http://bit.ly/1SIELve


14. Dr. Boyd Haley PhD - http://bit.ly/1KsdVby


15. Dr. Rashid Buttar - http://bit.ly/1gWOkL6


16. Dr. Roby Mitchell - http://bit.ly/1gdgEZU


17. Dr. Ken Stoller - http://bit.ly/1MPVqLI


18. Dr. Mayer Eisenstein - http://bit.ly/1LLEqHH


19. Dr. Frank Engley, PhD - http://bit.ly/1OHbLDI


20. Dr. David Davis - http://bit.ly/1gdgJwo


21. Dr Tetyana Obukhanych - http://bit.ly/16Z7k6J


22. Dr. Harold E Buttram - http://bit.ly/1Kru6Df


23. Dr. Kelly Brogan - http://bit.ly/1D31pfQ


24. Dr. RC Tent - http://bit.ly/1MPVwmu


25. Dr. Rebecca Carley - http://bit.ly/K49F4d


26. Dr. Andrew Moulden - http://bit.ly/1fwzKJu


27. Dr. Jack Wolfson - http://bit.ly/1wtPHRA


28. Dr. Michael Elice - http://bit.ly/1KsdpKA


29. Dr. Terry Wahls - http://bit.ly/1gWOBhd


30. Dr. Stephanie Seneff - http://bit.ly/1OtWxAY


31. Dr. Paul Thomas - http://bit.ly/1DpeXPf


32. Many doctors talking at once - http://bit.ly/1MPVHOv


33. Dr. Richard Moskowitz - http://bit.ly/1OtWG7D


34. Dr. Jane Orient - http://bit.ly/1MXX7pb


35. Dr. Richard Deth - http://bit.ly/1GQDL10


36. Dr. Lucija Tomljenovic - http://bit.ly/1eqiPr5


37. Dr Chris Shaw - http://bit.ly/1IlGiBp


38. Dr. Susan McCreadie - http://bit.ly/1CqqN83


39. Dr. Mary Ann Block - http://bit.ly/1OHcyUX


40. Dr. David Brownstein - http://bit.ly/1EaHl9A


41. Dr. Jayne Donegan - http://bit.ly/1wOk4Zz


42. Dr. Troy Ross - http://bit.ly/1IlGlNH


43. Dr. Philip Incao - http://bit.ly/1ghE7sS


44. Dr. Joseph Mercola - http://bit.ly/18dE38I


45. Dr. Jeff Bradstreet - http://bit.ly/1MaX0cC


46. Dr. Robert Mendelson - http://bit.ly/1JpAEQr


47. Dr Theresa Deisher https://m.youtube.com/watch?feature=youtu.be&v=6Bc6WX33SuE


48. Dr. Sam Eggertsen- https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=8LB-3xkeDAE


Hundreds more doctors testifying that vaccines aren't safe or effective, in these documentaries....
1. Vaccination - The Silent Epidemic - http://bit.ly/1vvQJ2W


2. The Greater Good - http://bit.ly/1icxh8j


3. Shots In The Dark - http://bit.ly/1ObtC8h


4. Vaccination The Hidden Truth - http://bit.ly/KEYDUh


5. Vaccine Nation - http://bit.ly/1iKNvpU


6. Vaccination - The Truth About Vaccines - http://bit.ly/1vlpwvU


7. Lethal Injection - http://bit.ly/1URN7BJ


8. Bought - http://bit.ly/1M7YSlr


9. Deadly Immunity - http://bit.ly/1KUg64Z


10. Autism - Made in the USA - http://bit.ly/1J8WQN5


11. Beyond Treason - http://bit.ly/1B7kmvt


12. Trace Amounts - http://bit.ly/1vAH3Hv 


13. Why We Don't Vaccinate - http://bit.ly/1KbXhuf

…………………………..


At 11:26 AM 3/11/2019, you wrote:
Mitchel makes a good point with the example of fluoridation, but is there really robust evidence of a causal link between some vaccines and autism?

On Mon, Mar 11, 2019 at 11:23 AM Mitchel Cohen < [log in to unmask]> wrote:
Thanks for these important clarifications as to the AAPS, to Steve and Sigrid. And thanks to Maggie for faising this issue. Steve and Sigrid rightly critique only one of Maggie Zhou's links. And even there, there is indeed a causal relationship between SOME vaccines, containing particular adjuvants, to autism -- there are of course other so-called "environmental" (meaning pollutant) causes of autism as well.

Just because the proponent of an issue may be a rightwing organization does not make them wrong about the issue -- although it's usually for the wrong reasons that they're right. Take for instance the John Birch Society's longstanding opposition to fluoride in drinking water -- which has been exposed by some independent researchers as a waste product of the aluminum industry in the late 1940s and 1950s, not something the John Birch Society would touch in their explanations. (The JBS saw fluoridation as a "Communist plot" by the government, and not as an effluent of the very capitalism that they were endorsing.)

Mitchel


At 08:45 AM 3/11/2019, Steve Nadel wrote:
Thanks Sigrid.  Many people will have my initial reaction to the name, that it is a "professional" society, i.e. science based,   Here is an excerpt from the Wikipedia entry on AAPS which further elaborates Sigrid's points

The association is generally recognized as politically conservative or ultra-conservative, and its publication advocates a range of scientifically discredited hypotheses, including the belief that HIV does not cause AIDS, that being gay reduces life expectancy, that there is a link between abortion and breast cancer, and that there is a causal relationship between vaccines and autism.

They oppose aboriton, medicare/medicaid and all forms  of governmental health assistance. Here is a link to the Wikipedia article

On Mar 11, 2019, at 2:44 AM, Sigrid Schmalzer <[log in to unmask] > wrote:

Hi. The Association of American Physicians and Surgeons also opposes the Affordable Care Act and socialized medicine more generally. My sense is that the anti-vaxx movement is leaping on this endorsement because the AAPS because it has the appearance of medical authority. Let's be more critical.

Sigrid
On 3/10/19 7:41 PM, Maggie Zhou wrote:
There was a congressional hearing last week on the use of force to vaccinate (taking away exemptions).
https://ppjg.me/2019/03/05/hearing-on-the-use-of-force-to-vaccinate-taking-place-now/

Two medical associations have come out with statements against mandatory vaccinations in the past few days, the Association of American Physicians and Surgeons, and Physicians for Informed Consent.
https://ppjg.me/2019/03/05/medical-doctors-across-the-u-s-speak-out-against-mandatory-vaccination-laws/

Here's a well referenced and concise white paper on the evidence & science that support vaccine exemptions.  For those who think vaccination is supported by science, this is a must read.  (I've also sent other links to evidence before, so this adds to that.)
https://icandecide.org/white-papers/The-Evidence-Science-Support-Vaccine-Exemptions.pdf

Meanwhile, governments are doubling down on forced vaccinations.

ABC News is promoting that teens should defy their anti-vaxxer parents' judgement and choose to vaccinate themselves.
https://abc7chicago.com/health/ohio-teen-defies-anti-vaccine-mom-gets-his-shots/5134211/
"in at least 7 states a relatively new legal concept called the mature minor doctrine allows teens to petition to make their own medical decision."

Australian government decided to reduce welfare payments for unvaccinated children, to force poor families to vaccinate:
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-09-13/vaccinations-no-jab-no-pay-takes-effect/10169684

Maggie
--
Sigrid Schmalzer
Professor, History Department
University of Massachusetts Amherst
Website: http://sigridschmalzer.org

Proud member of the Massachusetts Society of Professors (MSP/MTA/NEA), the union representing faculty and librarians at UMass Amherst, and supporting public education and labor movements everywhere: umassmsp.org

Red Revolution, Green Revolution: Scientific Farming in Socialist China (University of Chicago Press, 2016)

Science for the People: Documents from America's Movement of Radical Scientists (University of Massachusetts Press, 2018)

Moth and Wasp, Soil and Ocean: Remembering Chinese Scientist Pu Zhelong's Work for Sustainable Farming (Tilbury House, 2018) -- picture book

The Fight Against Monsanto's Roundup: The Politics of Pesticides (SkyHorse, 2019), authored by Mitchel Cohen, is now available at bookstores everywhere! Please click on link to learn more.

The Fight Against Monsanto's Roundup: The Politics of Pesticides (SkyHorse, 2019), authored by Mitchel Cohen, is now available at bookstores everywhere! Please click on link to learn more.



While I was waiting for you to post the link to the video, I did a search on Gates & Vaccines to find out what you were talking about. One item i came up on was a Snopes fact check, that I now see is directly related to this video.


From the fact checking it is clear Gates has a fairly conventional liberal view on  value of reducing population growth in high birth rate countries & the just path to do so - i.e. improving women’s conditions (infant mortality, reliable income, etc.)  There are many areas where we can debate the relevance of neo-malthusian arguements as solutions to problems (climate, hunger, poverty, etc.)

HOwever, the issue here is not what we think of Gates, the work of his foundation or even the value of given women control over their birth rates.  It is the clear misrepresentation as stated in the Snope fact check, that there is some hidden conspiracy to create/use vaccines to reduce unwanted populations.

Thus this video is another path to a false critique of those in power that may be leftist in rhetoric, but is based on  creating unjustified fear of vaccines and fear of public health measures to increase vaccination (especially in poor countries with challenged public health resources, such as  in Madagascar which is currently reporting nearly 1000 deaths associated with  a measles outbreak)
Steve



On Mar 11, 2019, at 10:31 PM, Mitchel Cohen <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

I was wondering what people here think of this TED speech by Bill Gates, in which he lauds new vaccines for population control ....


The Fight Against Monsanto's Roundup: The Politics of Pesticides (SkyHorse, 2019), authored by Mitchel Cohen, is now available at bookstores everywhere! Please click on link to learn more.


Steve, I don't see how there can be any confusion as to what Gates is saying here. He says, outright, to use vaccines for population control in certain areas of the world.

I agree with you that this is used by rightwing groups, who suddenly evince caring about Third World populations, but be that as it may, Gates DID say these repugnant things, AND he is a major funder through his foundation of such projects.

Like it or not, that's the reality ...

Mitchel


At 03:00 AM 3/12/2019, you wrote:


While I was waiting for you to post the link to the video, I did a search on Gates & Vaccines to find out what you were talking about. One item i came up on was a Snopes fact check, that I now see is directly related to this video.

Here is the link https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/bill-gates-vaccinations-depopulation/

From the fact checking it is clear Gates has a fairly conventional liberal view on  value of reducing population growth in high birth rate countries & the just path to do so - i.e. improving women’s conditions (infant mortality, reliable income, etc.)  There are many areas where we can debate the relevance of neo-malthusian arguements as solutions to problems (climate, hunger, poverty, etc.)

HOwever, the issue here is not what we think of Gates, the work of his foundation or even the value of given women control over their birth rates.  It is the clear misrepresentation as stated in the Snope fact check, that there is some hidden conspiracy to create/use vaccines to reduce unwanted populations.

Thus this video is another path to a false critique of those in power that may be leftist in rhetoric, but is based on  creating unjustified fear of vaccines and fear of public health measures to increase vaccination (especially in poor countries with challenged public health resources, such as  in Madagascar which is currently reporting nearly 1000 deaths associated with  a measles outbreak)
Steve



On Mar 11, 2019, at 10:31 PM, Mitchel Cohen < [log in to unmask]> wrote:

I was wondering what people here think of this TED speech by Bill Gates, in which he lauds new vaccines for population control ....


The Fight Against Monsanto's Roundup: The Politics of Pesticides (SkyHorse, 2019), authored by Mitchel Cohen, is now available at bookstores everywhere! Please click on link to learn more.

The Fight Against Monsanto's Roundup: The Politics of Pesticides (SkyHorse, 2019), authored by Mitchel Cohen, is now available at bookstores everywhere! Please click on link to learn more.

Hi again,
OK, I take your point here that in Bill Gates's mind he wanted to use vaccines to save children's lives so that their parents would not want to have more kids -- a pretty dumb reversal of cause and effect, but okay. Maybe his intentions on that score are okay, even if his plan is nuts. Maybe.

So now we return to the actual arguments -- Bill Gates here was a side trip (even though I'm the one who introduced it). There's a difference between kids dying from measles in Madagascar and getting measles (or other diseases) here in the U.S., where most people have access to clean drinking water and sanitation -- and obtain lifetime immunity from having that disease as a child.

Mitchel


At 03:00 AM 3/12/2019, Steve Nadel wrote:


While I was waiting for you to post the link to the video, I did a search on Gates & Vaccines to find out what you were talking about. One item i came up on was a Snopes fact check, that I now see is directly related to this video.

Here is the link https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/bill-gates-vaccinations-depopulation/

From the fact checking it is clear Gates has a fairly conventional liberal view on  value of reducing population growth in high birth rate countries & the just path to do so - i.e. improving women’s conditions (infant mortality, reliable income, etc.)  There are many areas where we can debate the relevance of neo-malthusian arguements as solutions to problems (climate, hunger, poverty, etc.)

HOwever, the issue here is not what we think of Gates, the work of his foundation or even the value of given women control over their birth rates.  It is the clear misrepresentation as stated in the Snope fact check, that there is some hidden conspiracy to create/use vaccines to reduce unwanted populations.

Thus this video is another path to a false critique of those in power that may be leftist in rhetoric, but is based on  creating unjustified fear of vaccines and fear of public health measures to increase vaccination (especially in poor countries with challenged public health resources, such as  in Madagascar which is currently reporting nearly 1000 deaths associated with  a measles outbreak)
Steve



On Mar 11, 2019, at 10:31 PM, Mitchel Cohen < [log in to unmask]> wrote:

I was wondering what people here think of this TED speech by Bill Gates, in which he lauds new vaccines for population control ....


The Fight Against Monsanto's Roundup: The Politics of Pesticides (SkyHorse, 2019), authored by Mitchel Cohen, is now available at bookstores everywhere! Please click on link to learn more.

The Fight Against Monsanto's Roundup: The Politics of Pesticides (SkyHorse, 2019), authored by Mitchel Cohen, is now available at bookstores everywhere! Please click on link to learn more.

Is it correlation or causation? Because you know, the first cell phones were commercialised around 1983 – so was it maybe the advent of mobile communications technology that triggered a rise in autism? Or a significant increase in the popularity of balsamic vinegar, sales of which rose enormously after the late 1980s, round about when the National Child Vaccine  Injury Act was passed? Many, many things can be linked to the rise in incidence of autism over the period 1985 to the present. What is needed is a strong causational link, not correlation.

Of course, by linking it to the NCVIA you are only considering the USA, 5% of the world’s population. In Britain, where the link was first written up, the opposite applies, as far as I know, thanks to the Vaccine Damage Payments Act 1979 which paid out a lump sum to children injured by vaccines, still does, far as I know.

Is there an increase at all? In South Africa, local experts say there’s a clear increase in diagnoses – because of an improvement in access to both primary medical care and to secondary and tertiary care.

In the States, in a paper published online “in the American Journal of Medical Genetics on July 22, 2015, scientists at Penn State University report their analysis of 11 years of special-education enrollment data on an average of 6.2 million children per year. The researchers found no overall increase in the number of students enrolled in special education. They also found that the increase in students diagnosed with autism was offset by a nearly equal decrease in students diagnosed with other intellectual disabilities that often co-occur with autism. The researchers conclude that the large increase in the prevalence of autism is likely the result of shifting patterns of diagnosis that are complicated by the variability of autism and its overlap with other related disorders.”

That there is no causational link between vaccinations and autism is clear from the zillions of papers Phil has linked. In addition, you might find it interesting to read the work of the original journalist who worked long and hard to reveal the fraud perpetrated by Wakefield, Brian Deer (https://www.bmj.com/content/342/bmj.c5347 ).

Finally, life is full of miniscule risks which we all take in the interests of a generally safe and healthy community. I do so on the roads every day, obeying the agreed rules and stopping at red light, going on green, not knowing if anyone around me has failing brakes or is having a stroke which will send their car crashing into me. I obey the law about safety belts, even though the standard safety belt is not designed for a woman, let alone a short one, and I am therefore likely to be fairly severely injured in an accident. Better than hitting my head on the window, which I’ve done once already.

We do many things that have risk attached in order to secure a general level of safety for all. When you vaccinate your child, it is not only your child you are making safer, it is all the children and people around that child, especially those with compromised health.

 

Mandi Smallhorne

Freelance science writer

 

From: Science for the People Discussion List <[log in to unmask]> On Behalf Of David Barouh
Sent: 11 March 2019 09:12 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Evidence and science that support vaccine exemptions

 

So Phil, are you satisfied that the seeming chronological link of rising autism rates and ever more vaccinations is coincidental? And assuming there's really no established link, is this a reason to mandate universal vaccination?

 

On Mon, Mar 11, 2019, at 2:54 PM, Phil Gasper wrote:

Yes, I believe the studies have been discredited. Like everyone on this list, I'm well aware of the commercial pressures on research, but numerous meta studies conducterd by people with no links to the pharmaceutical industry and involving hundreds of thousands of people convinced me. You always have to look at the actual details.

 

On Mon, Mar 11, 2019 at 1:43 PM David Barouh <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

 

I suspect that rising autism rates are at least suggestive of a causal link. There's certainly a chronological link, dating back at least to the time that vaccine makers gained their immunity from liability for people damaged by vaccines and the consequent introduction of vaccines for ever more diseases. Can we really believe that studies establishing such a link have supposedly been "discredited," given the commercial bent of so much science these days, and given the commercial milieu in which all this is happening.

 

Much like climate science, the basic premise of which I'm not questioning, but which nonetheless has been hopeless politicized to the point that we are getting exact timeframes for disaster that spans a decade or less, and on the other hand, complete denial of its existenceare we sure that climate science really that advanced? I'm reminded of the Friedman Units, where Journalist Thomas Friedman, a big booster of the 2003 invasion of Iraq would every six months or so comment on that war's progress by saying that the US had "six months to get it right." 

 

The issue is of the government mandating vaccination, i.e. forcing people to undergo a medical procedure violating several of the body's natural defenses, which seems to be a violation of the Fourth, Fifth and probably the Eighth and Ninth, Amendments guaranteeing that people are "secure in their persons," not "deprived of life or liberty," do not have "cruel and unusual punishments inflicted," and are not denied rights "not specifically enumerated." Can anyone deny that vaccines have harmed at least some people? Which means that some people can be harmed, so that forcing people to partake in a sort of Russian Roulette simply cannot be legal or constitutional.

 

 

 

On Mon, Mar 11, 2019, at 1:18 PM, Mitchel Cohen wrote:

I guess it depends, David, on how one defines "robust".  :-)

 

Mitchel

 

At 11:26 AM 3/11/2019, you wrote:

 

Mitchel makes a good point with the example of fluoridation, but is there really robust evidence of a causal link between some vaccines and autism?

 

On Mon, Mar 11, 2019 at 11:23 AM Mitchel Cohen < [log in to unmask]> wrote:

 

Thanks for these important clarifications as to the AAPS, to Steve and Sigrid. And thanks to Maggie for fraising this issue. Steve and Sigrid rightly critique only one of Maggie Zhou's links. And even there, there is indeed a causal relationship between SOME vaccines, containing particular adjuvants, to autism -- there are of course other so-called "environmental" (meaning pollutant) causes of autism as well.

Just because the proponent of an issue may be a rightwing organization does not make them wrong about the issue -- although it's usually for the wrong reasons that they're right. Take for instance the John Birch Society's longstanding opposition to fluoride in drinking water -- which has been exposed by some independent researchers as a waste product of the aluminum industry in the late 1940s and 1950s, not something the John Birch Society would touch in their explanations. (The JBS saw fluoridation as a "Communist plot" by the government, and not as an effluent of the very capitalism that they were endorsing.)

Mitchel

 

 

At 08:45 AM 3/11/2019, Steve Nadel wrote:

 

Thanks Sigrid.  Many people will have my initial reaction to the name, that it is a "professional" society, i.e. science based,   Here is an excerpt from the Wikipedia entry on AAPS which further elaborates Sigrid's points

The association is generally recognized as politically conservative or ultra-conservative, and its publication advocates a range of scientifically discredited hypotheses, including the belief that HIV does not cause AIDS, that being gay reduces life expectancy, that there is a link between abortion and breast cancer, and that there is a causal relationship between vaccines and autism.

 

They oppose aboriton, medicare/medicaid and all forms  of governmental health assistance. Here is a link to the Wikipedia article

 

On Mar 11, 2019, at 2:44 AM, Sigrid Schmalzer <[log in to unmask] > wrote:

Hi. The Association of American Physicians and Surgeons also opposes the Affordable Care Act and socialized medicine more generally. My sense is that the anti-vaxx movement is leaping on this endorsement because the AAPS because it has the appearance of medical authority. Let's be more critical.

Sigrid

On 3/10/19 7:41 PM, Maggie Zhou wrote:

 

There was a congressional hearing last week on the use of force to vaccinate (taking away exemptions).

Two medical associations have come out with statements against mandatory vaccinations in the past few days, the Association of American Physicians and Surgeons, and Physicians for Informed Consent.

Here's a well referenced and concise white paper on the evidence & science that support vaccine exemptions.  For those who think vaccination is supported by science, this is a must read.  (I've also sent other links to evidence before, so this adds to that.)

Meanwhile, governments are doubling down on forced vaccinations.

ABC News is promoting that teens should defy their anti-vaxxer parents' judgement and choose to vaccinate themselves.

https://abc7chicago.com/health/ohio-teen-defies-anti-vaccine-mom-gets-his-shots/5134211/

"in at least 7 states a relatively new legal concept called the mature minor doctrine allows teens to petition to make their own medical decision."

Australian government decided to reduce welfare payments for unvaccinated children, to force poor families to vaccinate:

Maggie

--

Sigrid Schmalzer

Professor, History Department

University of Massachusetts Amherst

 

Proud member of the Massachusetts Society of Professors (MSP/MTA/NEA), the union representing faculty and librarians at UMass Amherst, and supporting public education and labor movements everywhere: umassmsp.org

 

 

Moth and Wasp, Soil and Ocean: Remembering Chinese Scientist Pu Zhelong's Work for Sustainable Farming (Tilbury House, 2018) -- picture book

The Fight Against Monsanto's Roundup: The Politics of Pesticides (SkyHorse, 2019), authored by Mitchel Cohen, is now available at bookstores everywhere! Please click on link to learn more.

 

From a random sampling of these links, I could reiterate what I mentioned previously, that autism cases rose many fold and quite rapidly some time after vaccine makers received immunity from liability in the late '80s, following which the sheer number of vaccines administered to children exploded. In my childhood, smallpox and polio were the only two vaccines we received. Most of us went through all the childhood diseases of the time—no big deal. Now, vaccines number many multiples of that, and are administered starting in infancy! 

Two points: Bodies are selectively porous. Foods we ingest passes through the digestive system, i.e. filtered through an elaborate tube we can think of for practical purposes as being still outside the body. The needed materials are then allowed into the body proper and the rest eliminated. Vaccines bypass that elaborate front line of body defenses, with substances you'd never consume on your own being injected directly into the blood stream. Is it really surprising that they can do harm? Didn't the Supreme Court rule that they are "unavoidably unsafe"?

Second: Vaccines (and to a lesser degree antibiotics) are often given credit for the elimination of major diseases, but that credit should belong to the gradual introduction of all the modern public health and sanitation measures we take for granted: indoor running water, hot water, chlorination, refrigeration, heat, air conditioning, garbage collection, food inspections, and on and on. The kings and queens of old didn't have such luxuries. Imagine life without these, but with vaccines and antibiotics; which of these has the greater potential for spread of diseases?

On Tue, Mar 12, 2019, at 2:41 AM, Mitchel Cohen wrote:
Here's some robust evidence (only 30 percent or so of what has been gathered):

This is all of the research on vaccinations. ALL OF THESE STUDIES ARE PUBLISHED, LEGITIMATE STUDIES ON PUBMED which is a government database.

Vaccines and Autism

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3878266/
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21623535
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25377033
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24995277
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12145534
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21058170
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22099159
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3364648/
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17454560
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19106436
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3774468/
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3697751/
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21299355
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21907498
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11339848
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17674242
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21993250
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15780490
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12933322
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16870260

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19043938

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12142947

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24675092



Causal relationship between vaccine induced immunity and autism

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12849883



Subtle DNA changes and the overuse of vaccines in autism
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3364648/



Vaccine and Autism- a New Scientific Review
http://www.cbsnews.com/news/vaccines-and-autism-a-new-scientific-review/



Summary of previous Journal of Immunology
http://danmurphydc.com/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2011/01/AR-10-12-rata-AUTISM-VACCINE.pdf



Autism and Resulting Medical Conditions:
http://www.tacanow.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/09/autism-studies-april-2008.pdf



Mercury toxic encephalopathy manifesting with clinical symptoms of regressive autistic disorders.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17454560



Relation of mercury to high autism rates in boys
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16264412



Elevated levels of measles in children with Autism
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12849883



Abnormal MMR antibodies in children with autism
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12145534



Tylenol, MMR and Autism - A parent survey study
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18445737



A Positive Association found between Autism Prevalence and Childhood Vaccination
http://www.ingentaconnect.com/content/tandf/uteh/2011/00000074/00000014/art00002?token=004c170388ee06a6e5865462431636f5720415d23763c247b5e4e26634a492f2530332976261



Peer reviewed study on fetal cell contamination with retro virus associated with autism and cancer
http://www.globalresearch.ca/new-study-in-journal-of-public-health-finds-autism-and-cancer-related-to-human-fetal-dna-in-vaccines/5402912



Study documentation- Dr Deisher
http://www.ms.academicjournals.org/article/article1409245960_Deisher%20et%20al.pdf



Autism and mercury poisoning
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11339848



Hypothesis: conjugate vaccines may predispose children to autism spectrum disorders
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21993250



Rise in autism coincides with rise in vaccines
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21623535



A two-phase study evaluating the relationship between Thimerosal-containing vaccine administration and the risk for an autism spectrum disorder diagnosis in the United States
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3878266/


Elevated levels of measles antibodies in children with autism. - PubMed - NCBI
Pediatr Neurol. 2003 Apr;28(4):292-4. Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov


••••••••••••••••
A study published in the Journal of Biomedical Sciences determined that the autoimmunity to the central nervous system may play a causal role in autism. Researchers discovered that because many autistic children harbour elevated levels of measles antibodies, they should conduct a serological study of measles-mumps-rubella (MMR) and myelin basic protein (MBP) autoantibodies. They used serum samples of 125 autistic children and 92 controlled children. Their analysis showed a significant increase in the level of MMR antibodies in autistic children. The study concludes that the autistic children had an inappropriate or abnormal antibody response to MMR. The study determined that autism could be a result from an atypical measles infection that produces neurological symptoms in some children. The source of this virus could be a variant of MV, or it could be the MMR vaccine.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12145534


•••••••••••••••••••
    Lawsuit determines that federally required safety studies have not been performed in 30 years:


    Ethics behind WALVAX2:
    PBS on how vital fetal cells are for vaccine development:

    Polio vaccine causing polio again:
    Polio vaccine contaminated with HFM virus:
Herd Immunity
http://www.vaccinationcouncil.org/2012/02/18/the-deadly-impossibility-of-herd-immunity-through-vaccination-by-dr-russell-blaylock/

The term, ‘herd immunity’, was coined by researcher, A W Hedrich, after he’d studied the epidemiology of measles in USA between 1900-1931. His study published in the May, 1933 American Journal of Epidemiology concluded that when 68% of children younger than 15 yrs old had become immune to measles via infection, measles epidemics ceased. For several reasons, this natural, pre-vaccine herd immunity differed greatly from today’s vaccine ‘herd immunity’.1,2

When immunity was derived from natural infection, a much smaller proportion of the population needed to become immune to show the herd effect; compare the 68% measles immunity required for natural herd immunity to the very high percentages of vaccine uptake deemed necessary for measles vaccine ‘herd immunity’. In his ‘Vaccine Safety Manual’, Neil Z Miller cites research which concluded increasing vaccine uptake necessary for ‘herd immunity’ ranging from “70 to 80 percent of two year olds in inner cities” in 1991 to “‘close to 100 percent coverage’…with a vaccine that is 90 to 98 percent effective.” in 1997. Miller notes that, “When the measles vaccine was introduced in 1963, officials were confident that they could eradicate the disease by 1967.”

Subsequently, new dates for eradication were pronounced as 1982, 2000 and 2010. Meanwhile, “In 1990, after examining 320 scientific works from around the world, 180 European medical doctors concluded that ‘the eradication of measles…would today appear to be an unrealistic goal.’” And in 1984, Professor D. Levy of Johns Hopkins University had already “concluded that if current practices [of suppressing natural immunity] continue, by the year 2050 a large part of the population will be at risk and ‘there could in theory be over 25,000 fatal cases of measles in the U.S.A.’”

Disease-conferred immunity usually lasted a lifetime. As each new generation of children contracted the infection, the immunity of those previously infected was renewed due to their continual cyclical re-exposure to the disease; except for newly-infected children and the few individuals who’d never had the disease or been exposed to it, the ‘herd immunity’ of the entire population was maintained at all times.

Vaccine ‘herd immunity’ is hit-and-miss; outbreaks of disease sometimes erupt in those who follow recommended vaccine schedules. If they do actually “immunize”, vaccines provide only short-term immunity so, in an attempt to maintain ‘herd immunity’, health authorities hold ‘cattle drives’ to round up older members of the ‘herd’ for administration of booster shots. And on it goes, to the point that, now, it’s recommended we accept cradle-to-grave shots of vaccine against pertussis, a disease which still persists after more than sixty years of widespread use of the vaccine.

Russell Blaylock, MD remarks, “One of the grand lies of the vaccine program is the concept of “herd immunity”. In fact, vaccines for most Americans declined to non-protective levels within 5 to 10 years of the vaccines. This means that for the vast majority of Americans, as well as others in the developed world, herd immunity doesn’t exist and hasn’t for over 60 years.”3

In the pre-vaccine era, newborns could receive antibodies against infectious diseases from their mothers who had themselves been infected as children and re-exposed to the diseases later in life. Today’s babies born to mothers who were vaccinated and never exposed to these diseases do not receive these antibodies. In direct contrast to fear mongering disease “facts” and ‘herd immunity’ theories related by Public Health, most of today’s babies are more vulnerable than babies of the pre-vaccine era.

References:
1. “Monthly estimates of the child population ‘susceptible’ to measles, 1900-1931, Baltimore, Maryland”; A W Hedrich; American Journal of Epidemiology; May 1933 – Oxford University Press.

2. ‘Vaccine Safety Manual’ by Neil Z Miller; New Atlantean Press; 2008, 2009; pg 152.

3. Ibid; pgs 16-17.

https://www.facebook.com/axshlexy/posts/10154130529699126

"Q: Doesn't herd immunity protect most people?

A: Herd immunity (or community immunity) is a situation in which, through vaccination or prior illness, a sufficient proportion of a population is immune to an infectious disease, making its spread from person to person unlikely. Even individuals not vaccinated (such as newborns and those with chronic illnesses) are typically protected because the disease has little opportunity to spread within their community. Since pertussis spreads so easily, vaccine protection decreases over time, and acellular pertussis vaccines may not prevent colonization (carrying the bacteria in your body without getting sick) or spread of the bacteria, we can't rely on herd immunity to protect people from pertussis." < https://www.cdc.gov/pertussis/about/faqs.html#increasing >


Questions to ask your doctor/ped regarding vaccinations:


Question-1: If measles vaccines confer measles immunity, then why do already-vaccinated children have anything to fear from a measles outbreak?

Question-2: If vaccines work so well, then why did Merck virologists file a False Claims Act with the U.S. government, describing the astonishing scientific fraud of how Merck faked its vaccine results to trick the FDA?

Question-3: If vaccines don’t have any links to autism, then why did a top CDC scientist openly confess to the CDC committing scientific fraud by selectively omitting clinical trial data after the fact in order to obscure an existing link between vaccines and autism?

Question-4: If mercury is a neurotoxic chemical, then why is it still being injected into children and pregnant women via vaccines? Why does the vaccine industry refuse to remove all the mercury from vaccines in the interests of protecting children from mercury?

Question-5: If vaccines are so incredibly safe, then why does the vaccine industry need absolute legal immunity from all harm caused by its products?

Question-6: If vaccines work so well to prevent disease, then why do some vaccines (like the chickenpox vaccine) openly admit that they can cause the spread of chickenpox?

Question-7: If vaccines are so great for public health, then why do these historical public health charts show nearly all the declines in infectious disease taking place BEFORE vaccines arrived on the scene?

Question-8: If vaccines are perfectly safe, then why did at least 13 people recently die in Italy after being vaccinated?

Question-9: If vaccines are so trustworthy, then why did a pro-vaccine group in Africa recently discover ­ to its shock and horror ­ that vaccines being given to young African women were secretly laced with abortion chemicals?

Question-10: If vaccines are backed by solid science, then why do some vaccine inserts openly admit they are backed by no clinical trials?

Question-11: If vaccines are so safe, then why does this vaccine insert admit that the Gardasil vaccine causes “acute respiratory illness” in babies who consume the breast milk of mothers who have been vaccinated?

Question-12: If vaccines are so safe, then why does this Gardasil insert sheet admit that the vaccine causes “seizure-like activity, headache, fever, nausea and dizziness” and can even cause those injected with the vaccine to lose consciousness and fall, resulting in injury?

Question-13: If vaccines are backed by so much “science” then why do they frequently admit there really aren’t any studies of the vaccine for the very groups of people who are often injected with it?

Question-14: If vaccines are so safe to give to pregnant women, then why do the vaccine insert sheets openly admit most of them have never been tested for safety in pregnant women? In fact, this vaccine admits “the effects of the vaccine in foetal development are unknown.”Question-15: If vaccines are so safe to be injected into the bodies of children and pregnant women, then why do their own insert sheets readily admit they are manufactured with a cocktail of toxic chemical ingredients including “foetal bovine serum?” (The blood serum of aborted baby cows.)

Question-16: If vaccines achieve absolute immunity, then why are as many as 97 percent of children struck by infectious disease already vaccinated against that disease?

Question-17: If vaccines are totally safe and effective, then why did this five-year-old girl recently die from the very strain of flu she was just vaccinated against?

Question-18: If the mainstream media claims to report honest, unbiased information about vaccines, then why was there a total nationwide blackout on the news of the CDC whistle-blower admitting vaccines are linked to autism?


Doctors who explain clearly why vaccines aren't safe or effective.
1. Dr. Nancy Banks - http://bit.ly/1Ip0aIm


2. Dr. Russell Blaylock - http://bit.ly/1BXxQZL


3. Dr. Shiv Chopra - http://bit.ly/1gdgh1s


4. Dr. Sherri Tenpenny - http://bit.ly/1MPVbjx


5. Dr. Suzanne Humphries - http://bit.ly/17sKDbf


6. Dr. Larry Palevsky - http://bit.ly/1LLEjf6


7. Dr. Toni Bark - http://bit.ly/1CYM9RB


8. Dr. Andrew Wakefield - http://bit.ly/1MuyNzo


9. Dr. Meryl Nass - http://bit.ly/1DGzJsc


10. Dr. Raymond Obomsawin - http://bit.ly/1G9ZXYl


11. Dr. Ghislaine Lanctot - http://bit.ly/1MrVeUL


12. Dr. Robert Rowen - http://bit.ly/1SIELeF


13. Dr. David Ayoub - http://bit.ly/1SIELve


14. Dr. Boyd Haley PhD - http://bit.ly/1KsdVby


15. Dr. Rashid Buttar - http://bit.ly/1gWOkL6


16. Dr. Roby Mitchell - http://bit.ly/1gdgEZU


17. Dr. Ken Stoller - http://bit.ly/1MPVqLI


18. Dr. Mayer Eisenstein - http://bit.ly/1LLEqHH


19. Dr. Frank Engley, PhD - http://bit.ly/1OHbLDI


20. Dr. David Davis - http://bit.ly/1gdgJwo


21. Dr Tetyana Obukhanych - http://bit.ly/16Z7k6J


22. Dr. Harold E Buttram - http://bit.ly/1Kru6Df


23. Dr. Kelly Brogan - http://bit.ly/1D31pfQ


24. Dr. RC Tent - http://bit.ly/1MPVwmu


25. Dr. Rebecca Carley - http://bit.ly/K49F4d


26. Dr. Andrew Moulden - http://bit.ly/1fwzKJu


27. Dr. Jack Wolfson - http://bit.ly/1wtPHRA


28. Dr. Michael Elice - http://bit.ly/1KsdpKA


29. Dr. Terry Wahls - http://bit.ly/1gWOBhd


30. Dr. Stephanie Seneff - http://bit.ly/1OtWxAY


31. Dr. Paul Thomas - http://bit.ly/1DpeXPf


32. Many doctors talking at once - http://bit.ly/1MPVHOv


33. Dr. Richard Moskowitz - http://bit.ly/1OtWG7D


34. Dr. Jane Orient - http://bit.ly/1MXX7pb


35. Dr. Richard Deth - http://bit.ly/1GQDL10


36. Dr. Lucija Tomljenovic - http://bit.ly/1eqiPr5


37. Dr Chris Shaw - http://bit.ly/1IlGiBp


38. Dr. Susan McCreadie - http://bit.ly/1CqqN83


39. Dr. Mary Ann Block - http://bit.ly/1OHcyUX


40. Dr. David Brownstein - http://bit.ly/1EaHl9A


41. Dr. Jayne Donegan - http://bit.ly/1wOk4Zz


42. Dr. Troy Ross - http://bit.ly/1IlGlNH


43. Dr. Philip Incao - http://bit.ly/1ghE7sS


44. Dr. Joseph Mercola - http://bit.ly/18dE38I


45. Dr. Jeff Bradstreet - http://bit.ly/1MaX0cC


46. Dr. Robert Mendelson - http://bit.ly/1JpAEQr


47. Dr Theresa Deisher https://m.youtube.com/watch?feature=youtu.be&v=6Bc6WX33SuE


48. Dr. Sam Eggertsen- https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=8LB-3xkeDAE


Hundreds more doctors testifying that vaccines aren't safe or effective, in these documentaries....
1. Vaccination - The Silent Epidemic - http://bit.ly/1vvQJ2W


2. The Greater Good - http://bit.ly/1icxh8j


3. Shots In The Dark - http://bit.ly/1ObtC8h


4. Vaccination The Hidden Truth - http://bit.ly/KEYDUh


5. Vaccine Nation - http://bit.ly/1iKNvpU


6. Vaccination - The Truth About Vaccines - http://bit.ly/1vlpwvU


7. Lethal Injection - http://bit.ly/1URN7BJ


8. Bought - http://bit.ly/1M7YSlr


9. Deadly Immunity - http://bit.ly/1KUg64Z


10. Autism - Made in the USA - http://bit.ly/1J8WQN5


11. Beyond Treason - http://bit.ly/1B7kmvt


12. Trace Amounts - http://bit.ly/1vAH3Hv 


13. Why We Don't Vaccinate - http://bit.ly/1KbXhuf

Help build our People’s Green New Deal campaign:
sign up today!

William Gropper, Construction of the Dam (study for mural, the Department of the Interior, Washington, D.C.), 1938, oil on canvas, Smithsonian American Art Museum, Transfer from the U.S. Department of the Interior, National Park Service, 1965.18.11A-C</font size>

 

Science for the People calls for a “People’s Green New Deal” to combat the climate crisis with widespread democratic input.

Watch this page, sign on, & follow us on social media for more details about this campaign – coming the week of April 1st.

Resources       Organizer/Partner Organization Form

Next organizing webinar:  Sunday, March 24, 2019


The call for a Green New Deal put forward by Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez offers an opportunity to create transformative solutions to the interrelated crises of climate change, racism, xenophobia, and declining living standards for the majority.

Today, we have a once-in-a-generation opportunity to build a movement that can make this transformative vision a reality. We need you to sign up today to help us.

As the Green New Deal becomes part of the mainstream political discussion, there will be pressure to water it down, and to prioritize its most problematic elements over those that “require elected representatives to think outside of the normally accepted economic, social, industrial, and commercial parameters” (CJA).

The People’s Green New Deal campaign will fight to maintain the radical, popular promise at the heart of the GND proposal from Ocasio-Cortez and the Sunrise Movement and to strengthen the proposal through democratic input:

We promote solutions and struggles that educate, organize, mobilize, and directly empower working class people, Indigenous Peoples, historically oppressed communities, and migrants displaced by climate disaster, in their everyday lives.

We aim to collaborate with all of those who have developed the core ideas of the Green New Deal over the years and decades, particularly to ensure we understand the role of militarism in the climate crisis, and to fight for globally just solutions.

We stand with frontline communities demanding equitable solutions to the climate crisis, so that no member of our society will be forgotten or unjustly bear the costs of climate change.

We stand with trade unions demanding a Just Transition and the creation of millions of green jobs, so that all people may be able to support their families with dignity.

We call for a transformation of the economy which redistributes resources from those who led us into this crisis in the first place.

We will act to ensure the Green New Deal’s social, industrial, and economic transitions elevate the voices of workers, people of color, Indigenous Peoples, women, and migrants. We will lend our technical expertise to supporting solutions that are driven and controlled by these communities.

Addressing climate change is not only an urgent moral and ecological imperative. It is something that, if done right, can vastly improve the lives of millions, re-orient our society around values of solidarity, justice, and equality, and build a much more democratic world.

Join us today.

Sign this call for action & Get involved.

List of signatories:

Jamie Bemis, Science for the People NYC
Conor Dempsey, Science for the People NYC
David Hofmann, Science for the People Atlanta, Emory University, Atlanta, GA
Rebecca Orrison, Science for the People Albany,  State University of New York
Zach Zill, Science for the People NYC
Amber Keller, Habitat for Humanity, Atlanta, GA
Sheila Rosenthal, West Lafayette, IN
JoEllen McBride, PhD, Science for the People Magazine, Downingtown, PA
Danielle Powers, Science for the People NYC, New York, NY
Lisette Torres-Gerald, Science for the People – POC Caucus, Lincoln, NE
Julia Greenberg, Sault Sainte Marie, MI
Ben Allen, Federal contractor, Knoxville, TN
Edna Bonhomme, Max Planck for History of Science, Berlin, Germany
Corey Knox, University of Arizona, Tucson, AZ
Betty Tisel, Minneapolis, MN
Harvey Partica, Lewisburg, PA
Chelsea McCracken, Dixie State University, St. George, UT
fern MacDougal, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI
Karen Saunders, Western Mass Science for the People, Brattleboro, VT
Zoya Vallari, Caltech, Pasadena, CA
Geraldine MacKinnon, Univ. Professor, Santiago, Chile
Zhe Yu Lee, University of Wisconsin-Madison , Madison, WI
Cruz Rodriguez, Janesville , WI
Christy Dolph, Science for the People – Twin Cities, Minneapolis, MN
Andrew Butts, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN
Amy Donahue, Froedtert & the Medical College of Wisconsin, Milwaukee, WI
Thea Riofrancos, DSA Ecosocialist Working Group/ Providence DSA, Providence, RI
Lauren Fleer, Philadelphia, PA
Daniel Parker, Jonesboro, AR
Rachel Meirs, Columbia University Mailman School of Public Health, Brooklyn, NY
Eduardo Remes, Science for the People, Brooklyn, NY
Laura Peñaranda, Science for the People NYC, CUNY, New York, NY
Nicholas Hart, Seattle, WA
Sherry J Wolf, International Socialist Organization, Brooklyn, NY
Roxanne R. Young, Austin, TX
John Kerin, Los Angeles, CA
Amy Muldoon, Communication Workers of America, Astoria, NY
Arani Roy, University of Minnesota, Roseville, MN
Daniel Adkins, Arlington, Va
John McGrath, Labour Party, London, UK
Victoria DiMassa, Worcester, MA
Bill Fletcher Jr, former president, TransAfrica Forum, Mitchellville, MD
Matteo Farinella, Columbia University, New York, NY
Aparna Raghu , Lynn, MA
Erik Wallenberg, Science for the People, Minneapolis, MN
Vicky Cannon, Lone Star College , Spring, TX
Avik Herur-Raman, Macalester College YDSA, St. Paul, MN
Michael Pisaro , CalArts, Valencia , CA
Elaine Loeffler, Finland, MN
Brian Ward, International Socialist Organization, Madison , MN
Katherine L Bryant, Radboud University, Nijmegen, Nederland
Jared Story, University of Tennessee at Chattanooga
Jen Sauer, Knoxville, TN
Dante O’Hara, University of California- Riverside
Soren Hough, Science for the People Magazine, University of Cambridge
Lilian Smith, Brooklyn, NY
Dave Robinson, Denver DSA
Noah Weaverdyck, Science for the People Ann Arbor
Elizabeth Bissell, Putney, VT
Laura Beth Pelner, Washington DC
Simone Godwin, Science for the People Knoxville, University of Tennessee
Andrew Foltz-Morrison, Science for the People NYC
Jonathan Weil, Science for the People NYC
Maggie Baisley, Whispering Pines, NC
Jacob Herbers, University of Minnesota, MN
Helen Zhao, Columbia University, NY
Phil Gasper, Madison Area Technical College, WI
Chris Dols, Science for the People, NY
Christopher Baum, International Socialist Organization, NY
Eric Ruder, Better Off Red Podcast, NY
Ashley Theissen, International Socialist Organization, KY
Joan McKiernan, Bronx, NY
Devon Armstrong, Milwaukee, WI
Lee Wengraf, Author of Extracting Profit, NY
Arielle Lawson, Hunter College, NY
Chris Manley, International Socialist Organization, NY
Cami Q, New York, NY
Greg Morin, Rochester, NY
Rick Sprout, Green Party, NY
Justice Smith, North Seattle Progressives, WA
Miran Božičević, Science for the People, NY
Jean Hricik, McDonough, NY
Nantina Vgontzas, GSOC-UAW 2110, NY
Tim LaRock, Northeastern University, MA
Mel Bienenfeld, President of Westchester Community College Federation of Teachers, NY
Jon Isaac, International Socialist Organization – Madison, WI
Michael Gasser, Science for the People, Santa Cruz California
Ben Silver, New York NY
Ansley Hobbs, CUNY School of Public Health, Brooklyn New York
Lisa Duggan, New York University, New York NY
Jonathan Gottlieb, International Socialist Organization, New York NY
Stephen Fernandez, Rowan University, NJ
Jonathan Weil, New York, NY
Amanda Champion, New York, NY
Nikki Crook, Families for Climate Action, Brooklyn, NY
Hala Iqbal, New York University, NY
Nathalie Gilet, New York, NY
Aya Charafeddine, New York University, NY
Lia Soorenian, Columbia University, NY
Jared Willard, University of Minnesota, MN
Sheila Rosenthal, West Lafayette, IN
Colleen Baublitz, Columbia University, NY
Frank Rosenthal, Purdue University, IN
Maggie Lee, University of Tennessee Knoxville, TN
Justin C Burton, Emory University, GA
Bernhard Altaner, Technical University of Munich, Germany
Alyce Santoro, Rhode Island School of Art and Design, RI
Sam Anderson, National Black Education Agenda, NY
Anthony Levenda, Arizona State University, AZ
Emily Hoffman, University of Tennessee Institute of Agriculture, TN
Ahmed Hafezi, New York University, NY
Shejla Pollozi, Lehman College, The Graduate Center, The City University of New York, NY
Emma Harnisch, Science for the People – Western Massachusetts, MA
Arthur Borden-Heilman, Brooklyn, NY
Brian Ward, International Socialist Organization, WI
Daniel Casey Adkins, Democratic Socialists of America, VI
M. Elias Dueker, Bard College, NY
Zoe Grossman, Bright Power, NY
Zoe Kaufman, Brooklyn, NY
Rebecca Mason, University of San Francisco, CA
Andrea Guinn, Democratic Socialists of America, NY
Andrew McNamara, Bright Power, NY
Bill Bigelow, Rethinking Schools, OR
Pamela Parker, Parsons School of Design, NY
Connie Chow, University of Massachusetts Boston, MA


Revamping science: Making room for more voices

March 12, 2019, Dartmouth College
Credit: CC0 Public Domain

Science is known for being objective and apolitical, but is it? Historically speaking, the voices of underrepresented groups have been missing from science, resulting in an often incomplete and fragmented perspective of the world. Without these voices, we are left with skewed ideas about race, ethnicity, class, sex, gender, and sexuality, how these concepts get made, and how they affect people's lives. A new collection of essays published today in the Vital Topics Forum of American Anthropologist unpacks how increasingly diverse scientists speak back to these problems, by offering new and more complete understandings of human and nonhuman diversity.

In these essays, scientists challenge us to move beyond thinking about race as innate and to consider its consequences, including how racism impacts people's bodies and lives. Others push against oversimplifications of sex, gender, and sexuality, highlighting how the complexities of human diversity have been erased. Scientists from diverse backgrounds also draw attention to the ways that their bodies and experiences shape access to science, and how barriers to participation limit the scope of scientific research.

Diversity in science is therefore about more than visibility and representation; it brings the opportunity to change science for the better. Changing who we are in science makes it possible to change what we know.

In 18 essays, 20 anthropologists from diverse sex, gender, class, racial, ethnic, and religious backgrounds reflect on who they are and how that informs their science. This Vital Topics Forum is co-edited by Deborah A. Bolnick, an associate professor of anthropology and member of the Institute of Systems Genomics at the University of Connecticut; Rick W. A. Smith, a postdoctoral fellow with the department of anthropology and the Neukom Institute for Computational Science at Dartmouth College; and Agustín Fuentes, Edmund P. Joyce C.S.C. Professor of Anthropology and chair of the department of anthropology at the University of Notre Dame. All three also contributed essays to the collection.

In their introduction to the series, Smith and Bolnick reflect on how science has always been a view from somewhere, and how "historically, biological anthropology has often reflected classist, patriarchal, heterosexist, white supremacist, and other settler colonial agendas."

"In this Vital Topics Forum, we question the ways that these agendas have shaped the practice of science and the framing of scientific knowledge, even as their influences have typically gone unrecognized," explains Bolnick.

"Marginalized people have always known that science is partial and political," notes Smith. "There's been this idea that 'real' science only includes a narrow set of perspectives about how the world works, but that's because access to science has long been denied to marginalized people. The resulting lack of diverse ideas in science isn't evidence of its neutrality, it is evidence of its exclusionism. Diversifying science brings with it the possibility of changing science itself."

"Science, including anthropology, has a long history of conducting research that has been deeply harmful and unethical," adds Bolnick. "Studies have sometimes been carried out without consent from the individuals and communities affected by the research, and science has often served to justify discrimination, racism, the displacement of Indigenous peoples from their ancestral homelands, and the enslavement, abuse, exploitation and oppression of marginalized peoples. Change is long overdue."

Recent studies have shown that more diverse research teams create higher quality outcomes. "This is not a conversation about identity politics but about shifting the narrative in science to better reflect who we are and how we make sense of the world around us. Diversity enhances the capacity of science to better understand the processes of the world. Including a broader array of histories and identities is essential, if we want to create the best quality science," says Fuentes.

This Vital Topics Forum grew out of a high-profile symposium at the 86th Annual American Association of Physical Anthropologists Meeting in 2017, during which researchers reflected on how historically marginalized scientists are reshaping the field of biological anthropology.

These pieces demonstrate the power of diversity to transform scientific knowledge in biological anthropology, providing a model for what is possible across other science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM) fields.

"Diversity is not just about visibility and representation," concludes Smith. "It is also about making new and vital science together."