MMR Vaccine’s Poison Pill: Mumps After Puberty, Reduced Testosterone and Sperm Counts

From Children's Health Defense

This article represents Part I of a two-part series on mumps. Part II will delve further into the mumps vaccine’s spillover effects on fertility.

By Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., Chairman of the Board, Children’s Health Defense

Across the country, frenzied legislators are responding to the pharmaceutical industry’s orchestrated fear campaign around measles by seeking to impose further mandating of Merck’s measles, mumps and rubella (MMR) vaccine. Although ongoing mumps outbreaks involving thousands of at-risk adolescents and young adults completely dwarf the number of measles cases, no one is covering the mumps story—because it will expose the fact that Merck has been in court for over eight years due to scientists blowing the whistle on Merck’s fabrication and falsification of the effectiveness of the mumps component of its MMR vaccine. Instead of punishing Merck for its chicanery, legislatures are rewarding the company by making it impossible to refuse Merck’s profitable vaccine, subjecting a generation of American children to the risk of serious complications from mumps infection at an age that nature never intended.

When younger children experience mumps, the virus is relatively harmless; infected children often exhibit no symptoms. When mumps strikes adolescents or adults, on the other hand, the infection can cause far more serious adverse effects, including inflammation of various organs (brain, pancreas, ovaries and testicles)—as well as damage to male fertility.

Inflammation of one or both testicles (a condition called orchitis) occurs in approximately one in three post-pubertal men who get mumps and can contribute to sperm defects and subfertility as well as impairing the function of cells that produce testosterone. An estimated 30% to 87% of men with bilateral orchitis induced by mumps experience full-blown infertility—a major cause for concern given the significant declines in male fertility observed over the past several decades. Thus, it appears that Merck’s vaccine, instead of protecting children, not only delays onset of disease to later age cohorts but has the potential to cause serious and permanent injury.

Merck and mumps vaccines

Let’s look at a quick history of mumps and MMR vaccination in the United States. The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) licensed Merck’s initial mumps-only vaccine in 1967. In 1971, Merckintroduced its first combination MMR vaccine, followed by the MMR-II vaccine in 1978 (which repurposed the rubella component) and the MMR-plus-varicella (MMRV) ProQuad vaccine in 2005. Since the initial 1967 vaccine, Merck has enjoyed a unique monopoly position in the U.S. market for mumps and MMR vaccines, with combined sales of MMR-II and ProQuad bringing in over $720 million in 2014 alone. Merck consistently places in the top five pharmaceutical companies globally, and the market valued its stocks at a seven-year high as of late 2018.… Merck has willfully and illegally maintained its monopoly through ongoing manipulation and by representing to the public and government agencies a falsely inflated efficacy rate for its Mumps Vaccine.

In order to score the lucrative MMR monopoly, Merck needed to satisfy the FDA that all three components of the combination vaccine could achieve 95% efficacy, but the mumps portion was bedeviling. In fact, as alleged in a lawsuit filed by two senior Merck scientists in 2010 under the False Claims Act, the company has known since the late 1990s that the mumps component of the MMR is “far less” than 95% effective. A 2005 study published in Vaccine estimated the effectiveness of mumps vaccination to be closer to 69%, and the authors noted that their results were consistent with other studies.

The two whistleblowers assert in the lawsuit—which is reportedly headed to trial sometime this year—that Merck has “willfully and illegally maintained its monopoly” through “ongoing manipulation” and by “representing to the public and government agencies a falsely inflated efficacy rate for its Mumps Vaccine.” Specifically, the two scientists claim that Merck executives ordered them to use “rigged” methodologies, including taking antibodies from rabbits and adding them to human blood vials, in order to gull regulators into assuming an antibody response robust and durable enough to merit licensing. When those “enhanced” tactics did not achieve Merck’s “fabricated [95%] efficacy rate,” the whistleblowers allege, the company resorted to simply falsifying the test data and engaging in other fraudulent activities.The fact that we have mumps showing up in highly immunized populations likely reflects something about the effectiveness of the vaccine.

Unprotected adolescents and young adults

The poor performance of the MMR’s mumps component and the doubtful “durability” of mumps-specific immunity following vaccination are of concern. In fact, we are already living with the legacy of this badly flawed vaccine. Rather than protecting a generation of American children from mumps infection in childhood, the vaccine has merely postponed the onset of the virus to older age groups, putting them at much greater risk. Researchers confirm an increase in the median age of mumps patients, a surge in the size and number of mumps outbreaks in highly vaccinated populations and higher rates of complications—including orchitis.

Across the country, galloping mumps epidemics have been ravishing an older generation of vaccinated individuals. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) reported 150 outbreaks (9,200 cases) in the year and a half from January 2016 to June 2017, affecting “schools, universities, athletics teams and facilities, church groups, workplaces, and large parties and events.”

Over the past several years, the number of college campuses reporting mumps outbreaks has exploded—at institutions ranging from Harvard and Temple to Syracuse, Louisiana State and Indiana universities. At the University of Missouri, which in 2016 reported 193 mumps cases on campus, the health center director reported not having seen anything like it “in her 31 years at the school.” Commenting on the fact that all of the afflicted students had had the requisite two doses of MMR, she noted,

“The fact that we have mumps showing up in highly immunized populations likely reflects something about the effectiveness of the vaccine.”

The mumps virus has also made a “comeback” in other settings where younger adults congregate. For example, a naval ship deployed to the Persian Gulf, the USS Fort McHenry, has been unable to come ashore since early January because of a mumps contagion that has devastated its crew—even though the military vaccinates all personnel against the virus and despite the Navy having immediately subjected the crew in question to another MMR booster. News accounts have declined to comment on mumps complications but describe the quarantine as “a morale killer” for crew members who are accustomed to having monthly port calls. Infection control protocols stipulate that the Navy cannot declare the situation “under control” until “50 days after the last affected service member recovers.”

Endangering rather than protecting youth

All of these cohorts are part of an age group that should never get mumps. As Children’s Health Defense recently noted, whereas “flares of illness in vaccinated groups should prompt some serious questions about vaccine failure,” legislators and government agencies “are displaying a dangerous indifference to vaccination’s unintended consequences.” Dancing to puppet strings manipulated by Merck, legislators across the country are trying to foist even harsher MMR mandates on unwilling Americans, dooming a generation of children to the serious risks of late-onset mumps infections.

---

Part II

It has been about five decades since the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approved Merck’s first mumps vaccine. The company began launching combination MMR (measles, mumps and rubella) vaccines in the 1970s. Coincidentally—or not—an infertility crisis has been brewing over roughly the same time period, with dramatic declines in sperm counts and record-lowfertility levels. However, few investigators seem interested in assessing whether mumps outbreaks in highly vaccinated populations of teens and young adults could be having long-termeffects on fertility or other health indicators.

As described in Part I, childhood MMR vaccination has been an unmitigated disaster where mumps is concerned, deferring mumps infection to older ages and leaving adolescents and young adults vulnerable to serious reproductive complications. Public health reports show that the vast majority of mumps cases and outbreaks occur in youth who have been fully vaccinatedwith the prescribed two-dose MMR series, supporting a hypothesis of “waning immunity after the second dose.” FDA and Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) officials even admitthat mumps outbreaks in the post-vaccination era “typically involve young adults,” and that vaccination is failing to protect those who are college-age and above.

Myopically, many vaccine experts have called for a third MMR dose—or even “booster dosing throughout adulthood”—even though the FDA’s and CDC’s own research shows that MMR boosters in college-age youth barely last one year. As alleged in whistleblower lawsuits wending their way through the courts over the past eight years, Merck presented the FDA with a “falsely inflated efficacy rate” for the MMR’s mumps component, using animal antibodies and other fraudulent tactics to fool FDA—and the public—into believing that the vaccine was effective.

When infection arises after puberty, however, mumps is no laughing matter, presenting an increased risk of complications such as hearing loss, encephalitis and inflammation of the reproductive organs.

Mumps after puberty is no laughing matter

Around the time that the first mumps vaccine came on the market, the 1967 children’s classic The Great Brain humorously depicted mumps infection in childhood as a mere nuisance. The book’s young protagonist goes out of his way to intentionally infect himself with mumps so that he can beat his two brothers to the recovery finish line—and he experiences no adverse consequences other than his siblings’ annoyance.

When infection arises after puberty, however, mumps is no laughing matter, presenting an increased risk of complications such as hearing loss, encephalitis and inflammation of the reproductive organs. About one in three postpubertal men with mumps develops orchitis(inflammation of the testes), which can damage sperm, affect testosterone production and contribute to subfertility and infertility. During a mumps outbreak in England in the mid-2000s, mumps orchitis accounted for 42% of all hospitalized mumps cases; the researchers attributed this outcome—which was the most common reason for hospitalization—to “the high attack rates in adolescents and young adults” that occurred “despite high coverage with two-dose MMR.” An analysis of a 2006 mumps outbreak in the U.S. reported that male patients were over three times more likely than female patients to experience complications, “due primarily to orchitis.”

An estimated 5% to 10% of postpubertal women will develop oophoritis (swelling of the ovaries) following mumps infection. Oophoritis is associated with premature menopause and infertility, but mumps-related oophoritis has garnered little notice.

Mumps infections are often asymptomatic or produce nonspecific symptoms such as fever, while cases of orchitis may present with no other mumps symptoms. Nonetheless, public health officials advise clinicians that orchitis is an instant cue to test for mumps virus, and testing often reveals elevated mumps antibodies. In a case report of MMR failure, British clinicians isolated a novel genetic strain of mumps virus from the patient’s semen two weeks after the onset of orchitis and found mumps RNA in the semen 40 days later; they also noted “the appearance of anti-sperm antibodies,” with “potential long-term adverse effects on the patient’s fertility.”

In 2017, researchers who reviewed 185 studies conducted in Western nations found that sperm counts had plummeted by 50% to 60% between 1973 and 2011—an average decrease of 1.4% annually. Commenting on this work, one analyst estimated that 20% to 30% of young men in Europe and North America have sperm concentrations associated with a reduced ability to father a child. Given estimates that as much as 40% of reproductive problems have to do with the male partner, there is agreement on the importance of “finding and eliminating [the] hidden culprits in the environment” that most researchers believe are to blame.

An estimated 5% to 10% of postpubertal women will develop oophoritis (swelling of the ovaries) following mumps infection. Oophoritis is associated with premature menopause and infertility, but mumps-related oophoritis has garnered little notice.

MMR’s and MMRV’s potential to impair fertility never studied

Merck has not evaluated either of its two MMR vaccines—the MMR-II and the MMR-plus-varicella (MMRV) vaccine—for their potential to impair fertility. Whether such testing would unearth direct effects on fertility (as appears to be possible with HPV vaccination in women) is thus unknown. However, mumps vaccination undeniably increases reproductive-age individuals’ risk of mumps infection and, in the process, increases the risk of fertility-altering complications. These facts alone should be attracting far more attention.

Unfortunately, because clinicians already tend to underdiagnose mumps infection and underestimate mumps complications, it is likely that they are failing to recognize possible vaccine-induced reproductive health consequences of mumps infection in their adolescent and young adult patients. In one university outbreak, “most physicians…did not suspect mumps,” and even when they became aware of the outbreak, “diagnosing mumps was not always straightforward.” Moreover, although differentiating between vaccine strains of mumps virus and wild types could provide valuable information, few clinicians have the capacity or inclination to perform testing of this type. A Japanese study of cerebrospinal fluid and saliva from patients with mumps complications found vaccine strain in nearly all of the samples and noted the information’s importance in helping determine whether the complications were vaccine-related.

Those who have sought to understand mumps vaccines’ poor performance point to a mixture of explanatory factors. These include waning immunity, the high population density and close quarters encountered in settings such as college campuses, incomplete vaccine-induced immunity to wild virus as well as viral evolution such that “the vaccine triggers a less potent reaction against today’s mumps viruses than those of 50 years ago.” However, some also quietly admit that individuals with “mild vaccine-modified disease” could be perpetuating the chain of transmission. This latter point ought to be raising questions about the logic and wisdom of administering further rounds of MMR boosters during outbreaks while ignoring the problems created by the doses already given.

… some individuals respond poorly to mumps vaccination and vaccine-induced antibody levels correlate poorly with protection from mumps infection, irrespective of the number of additional doses of mumps-containing vaccine they receive.

Most scientists appear to be either resigned to ongoing mumps outbreaks in vaccinated populations or actually accept periodic outbreaks as the cost of doing business. Publications by FDA and CDC researchers reveal these agencies’ awareness that some individuals respond poorly to mumps vaccination and that vaccine-induced antibody levels correlate poorly with protection from mumps infection, “irrespective of the number of additional doses of mumps-containing vaccine they receive.” Considering the effects on fertility, the generally abysmal track record of mumps vaccination and Merck’s fraudulent claims about efficacy, it is hard to fathom medical and public health experts’ complacency about current mumps vaccines and vaccine policies.

How Public Vaccine Policy Violates Our Right to Informed Consent

By Jeremy R. Hammond from Foreign Policy Journal

Entrance to the headquarters of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention in Atlanta, Georgia

In the mainstream discourse about the subject of vaccines, one issue that is never directly raised is the right to informed consent. This right is one of the most fundamental ethics in medicine, and yet the government and media treat it as uniquely irrelevant when it comes to this one particular pharmaceutical product. The reality is that public vaccine policy subjects the entire population to a mass uncontrolled experiment, and legislation mandating their consumption constitutes a serious threat to both our health and our liberty. The major corporate media, for their part, have chosen to take on the role, in dutiful service to the state, of policy advocacy rather than journalism.

So let’s remedy that failure by taking a serious look at public vaccine policy in the context of the right to informed consent. (While focusing primarily on the US population, the information that follows also bears relevancy for other countries.)

The Inadequacy of Pre-Licensure Safety Trials

We’re supposed to believe that somehow the science is “settled” on vaccines. But that belief is preposterous. The reality is that there is endless debate and controversy about vaccines in the medical literature. The major corporate media don’t even begin to scratch the surface in their reporting on vaccines. There are countless serious issues related to vaccination that the public have no idea about because health officials and the media refuse to even touch them. The news media just repeat the same routine talking points in virtually every broadcast or article on the subject, spitting out misinformative propaganda instead of educational content.

One thing most people don’t know about vaccines—because they are told neither by public health officials, nor by the major media, nor by pediatricians or others working within the medical establishment—is that they aren’t held to the same standard as other pharmaceutical drugs when it comes to safety. We’re supposed to believe as gospel truth that vaccines recommended by the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) have been extensively studied and proven safe and effective. But that’s just not true. In fact, one significant difference between how the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) regulates vaccines versus other drugs is that pharmaceutical companies are not actually required to conduct long-term, randomized, placebo-controlled studies to demonstrate their vaccine products’ safety for use in human populations.

Nor do they do so. This can be seen simply by going to the FDA’s website and examining the manufacturers’ package inserts for vaccines licensed for use in the US market.

These inserts are required by law to disclose adequate warnings to consumers about the benefits and risks of the vaccine. Failure to provide adequate warnings is one of only two conditions under which a vaccine manufacturer can be sued in civil court for harms caused by vaccination. The other is failure to manufacture the vaccine according to specifications. Apart from failing on either of those counts, vaccine manufacturers have total legal immunity against vaccine injury lawsuits, which the government granted to them under a 1986 law designed to preserve existing public vaccine policy in the face of threats to vaccine supply resulting from injury lawsuits that were putting vaccine manufacturers out of business.

The law, the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act, also established the Vaccine Injury Compensation Program (VICP), which is funded by an excise tax on every vaccine dose administered and effectively shifts the financial burden for vaccine injuries away from the pharmaceutical industry and onto the taxpaying consumers.

As an example showing how proper safety studies are not required to gain FDA approval, take the Hepatitis B (HepB) vaccine. There are two brands that are licensed in the US for use in infants, and this vaccine is typically administered to newborn babies on the very first day of their lives. The CDC recommends this universally, even though the vast majority of babies are not at significant risk of infection. (The virus is transmitted by bodily fluids primarily through sex or injection drug users’ sharing of needles, so unless the mother or another close household contact is a carrier, infection of the infant is an improbability.) The CDC also recommends the vaccine to women during pregnancy. This is so despite the vaccine containing aluminum, which is used to provoke a stronger immune response, but which is also a known neurotoxin. Until it was phased out of most childhood vaccines starting in 1999, the HepB vaccine also contained a preservative called thimerosal, which by weight is half ethylmercury, another known neurotoxin that, like aluminum, crosses both the placental and blood-brain barriers and accumulates in the brain.

Neither of the two HepB vaccines on the market recommended for use in both newborns and pregnant women were studied to determine the safety of these practices. The two vaccines are Merck’s Recombivax B and GlaxoSmithKline’s Engerix-B. Both products’ package inserts state explicitly that “no adequate and well-controlled studies” have been done to evaluate the vaccine’s safety in pregnant women. Merck did include infants in three clinical trials, but it included them with older children up to 10 years of age, rendering the results uninterpretable with respect to the safety of vaccinating babies. Furthermore, the studies included only 147 children, had no placebo control group, and had a follow-up period of only five days. Hence, the trials could not possibly have detected any but the most frequently occurring and immediate-term adverse events. GSK’s trials were larger, including 5,071 subjects. But once again, infants were included with healthy adults and children, there was no placebo control group for comparison, and the follow-up period was just four days.

For another example, take the flu shot. Inactivated influenza vaccines are also recommended by the CDC for use in pregnant women, as well as infants as young as six months. Whereas it was removed from other vaccines routinely recommended for children, multi-dose vials of the influenza vaccine still contain mercury. As with the HepB vaccine, flu shot manufacturers disclose in their package inserts that safety and effectiveness of the vaccine have not been established in pregnant women. A systematic review of the literature in 2014 by the prestigious Cochrane Collaboration—an international organization specializing in this type of study, also called a meta-analysis—noted that the number of randomized controlled trials to determine the safety of vaccinating pregnant women was zero. A 2012 Cochrane meta-analysis found no good evidence that the flu shot is effective at preventing the flu in children under age three and “no usable data” on the safety of vaccinating children under two. Given the CDC’s recommendation for vaccinating infants as young as six months, the study authors stressed that studies to determine the safety and effectiveness of this practice are “urgently required”.

These and numerous other Cochrane reviews have also warned that many of the included studies were industry funded, and that industry funding has, unsurprisingly, been shown to bias results in favor of the products under study.

As a 2012 review published in the American Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology noted, “prelicensure data on influenza vaccine safety and effectiveness during pregnancy is virtually nonexistent because of strict research guidelines that govern the participation of pregnant women”.

This raises an obvious question: If it is considered unethical to include pregnant women in clinical vaccine safety trials, how is it not also unethical to recommend that all pregnant women be vaccinated in the absence of clinical trials demonstrating that this is safe?

How does this not treat pregnant women as the subjects of a mass uncontrolled experiment without their informed consent?

The Inadequacy of Post-Licensure Safety Studies and Surveillance

Once vaccines get to market, they undergo additional study. However, a CDC recommendation renders vaccination “standard of care” and so randomized, placebo-controlled studies generally are not conducted on the grounds that it would be “unethical” to do so since it would deny the placebo control group the supposed benefits of the presumably safe vaccine. This, of course, is the logical fallacy of begging the question (presuming the proposition to be proven in the premise).

Consequently, most of the studies that the CDC cites to support its policy recommendations are retrospective observational studies. These types of studies are not as well able to control for all the innumerable variables that one must consider, and so, while they may be useful for determining whether an association exists between a vaccine and a given adverse event, they can neither prove nor disprove causality.

To illustrate, all of the studies the CDC cites to support its claim that “Vaccines Do Not Cause Autism” are observational studies. Ironically, one of the studies it cites is a 2004 review by the Institute of Medicine (IOM), which acknowledged that the hypothesis that vaccines administered according to the CDC’s schedule can contribute to the development of autism in children with a genetic or environmental susceptibility cannot be excluded by such studies. Furthermore, none of the studies cited by the CDC and reviewed by the IOM were actually designed to test that hypothesis, which, the IOM further conceded, could explain why they had failed to find an association!

Apart from the lack of proper safety studies for individual vaccines, there has never been a long-term, randomized, placebo-controlled study comparing health outcomes—including rates of allergies, asthma, autoimmune disease, neurodevelopmental disorders, and cancer—between children vaccinated according to the CDC’s routine childhood schedule and children who’ve remained completely unvaccinated. The CDC refuses to do this type of study.

Under the 1986 law granting legal immunity to vaccine manufacturers, due to the insistence of organized parents whose children had been injured by vaccines, a surveillance system was also established called the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS). But this passive surveillance system is inadequate and not a reasonable substitute for properly designed safety studies, which vaccine manufacturers have little incentive to conduct, especially in light of their legal immunity against damages. One major problem with VAERS is the known underreporting of adverse events.

Both the Congress and the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), under whose auspices the CDC operates and which also administers the Vaccine Injury Compensation Program, have acknowledged that reports to VAERS represent only a small fraction of actual adverse events. A study by the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ), which also operates under HHS, found that adverse events from vaccines “are common, but underreported”, representing “fewer than 1% of vaccine adverse events”. The agency proposed a method to automate adverse event reporting rather than relying on passive reporting, but the project reached a dead end when the CDC refused to cooperate on its further development and implementation.

Population Level Effects of Mass Vaccination

Apart from the question of effectiveness in preventing the target disease and the risk of adverse events, there are numerous other factors that simply are not taken into consideration by those who are claiming to know what is best for us and exercising power over us to compel us to behave as they want us to. For example, in addition to individual effects, there are population effects. The same as irresponsible overuse of antibiotics has given rise to antibiotic-resistant “superbugs”, mass vaccination potentially can cause the evolution of viruses and bacteria into even more virulent strains. This is not merely hypothetical, but has been demonstrated in chickens mass vaccinated against Marek’s disease virus. Mass vaccination can also shift the risk burden for disease away from one subpopulation and onto another.

Among human vaccines, the pertussis vaccine provides a useful example. One fact the public is not being told is that, although the public is routinely told that they must vaccinate against pertussis to provide “herd immunity” to infants too young to be vaccinated, public health officials know perfectly well that the theory of vaccine-conferred herd immunity has been falsified. The FDA itself has shown in a study that the vaccine fails to prevent transmission, so that asymptomatic vaccinated individuals can still carry and spread the bacteria to others (and are more likely to be unaware that they are doing so and therefore less likely to quarantine themselves from other household members to protect the baby).

Additionally, the vaccine-conferred immunity is of very short duration, lasting only two to four years, resulting of a shift in the risk burden away from younger children and onto adolescents (so that, again, older vaccinated siblings pose a risk to infants in the household).

Another fact not being communicated to the public is that, due to mass vaccination, the pertussis bacteria, which causes whooping cough, has undergone a genetic shift so that today the dominant circulating strains are deficient in a protein called pertactin (PRN), which is an antigen component of the vaccine. This has contributed to the ineffectiveness of the vaccine, and in the words of the CDC based the findings of a study examining epidemics in Washington and Vermont, “vaccinated patients had significantly higher odds than unvaccinated patients of being infected with PRN-deficient strains.”

Another example of a population level effect of mass vaccination, already touched upon, is how it can shift the risk burden of the disease. For example, the measles vaccine has shifted the burden away from children, in whom it was generally a benign infection (in the US population), and onto those in whom it poses a significantly higher risk of potentially deadly complications: infants and adults. This is because vaccine-conferred immunity is inferior to natural immunity and not as long lasting, and, ironically, because vaccination has interrupted transmission so successfully. In the pre-vaccine era, the circulation of the virus provided a natural boosting effect to those who’d already had it as a child, thus protecting adults generally for a lifetime. Today, though, as vaccine immunity wanes, adults become vulnerable in the event of exposure. Infants are more vulnerable because mothers today are less well able to confer maternal passive immunity, antibodies transferred prenatally through the placenta and postnatally through breastmilk.

Evidence likewise indicates that vaccination against the varicella virus, which causes both chicken pox and shingles, has similarly caused a shift of the risk burden away from children, in whom is generally a mild illness, and onto adolescents and adults, for whom infection poses a greater risk. Due to the loss of natural immunologic boosting from repeated exposures, elderly people who had chicken pox as kids are at greater risk of the dormant virus reactivating and causing shingles. Rather than reconsidering its existing policy, however, the CDC’s answer was to just recommend, starting in 2008, that the elderly also get a newly developed shingles vaccine, too (this has since expanded to include younger adults, as well). A vaccine created to solve the problem created by another vaccine (similar to the practice of prescribing another drug to treat the symptoms caused by a drug previously prescribed to treat symptoms rather than to do anything to actually address the underlying cause).

In a study published in the prestigious journal Vaccine in 2013, a former CDC researcher and his coauthor, looking at CDC data, estimated that the CDC’s policy has not been cost effective, but has rather increased net health care costs. As they commented, vaccine-conferred immunity is “less effective than the natural immunity that existed in communities prior to licensure of the varicella vaccine. Hence, rather than eliminating varicella in children as promised, routine vaccination against varicella has proven extremely costly and has created continual cycles of treatment and disease.”

Other “Non-Specific Effects” of Vaccines

There is a term in the scientific literature used to describe the unintended consequences of vaccination, whether beneficial or detrimental: “non-specific effects”. One non-specific effect that has been found for the diphtheria, tetanus, and whole-cell pertussis (DTP) vaccine is an increased rate of childhood mortality.

The CDC used to recommend this vaccine for the US childhood population, but due to concerns about its safety, it was phased out in favor of a vaccine with an acellular pertussis component (DTaP). The DTP vaccine is still used around the world in developing countries, however, such as in World Health Organization (WHO) campaigns in Africa. There, researchers have found that the vaccine, despite being effective at reducing incidence of the target diseases, is associated with an increased mortality rate.

The hypothesized explanations for this again have to do with the differences between naturally acquired and vaccine-conferred immunity. Inactivated vaccines like DTP tend to bias the immune system toward humoral, or antibody, immunity at the expense of lost cell-mediated immunity, thus causing immune dysfunction that can increase the risk from other diseases that the vaccine is not designed to protect against. As the authors of a study published in the journal EBioMedicine in 2017 remarked, “All currently available evidence suggests that DTP vaccine may kill more children from other causes than it saves from diphtheria, tetanus or pertussis. Though a vaccine protects children against the target disease it may simultaneously increase susceptibility to unrelated infection.”

The influenza vaccine offers another good example of a non-specific effect, which is that getting an annual flu shot can actually increase your risk of getting the flu. While the vaccine is designed to protect against three or four viral strains by stimulating an antibody response, natural influenza infection confers not only humoral, but also a robust cell-mediated immunity. Unlike the vaccine, natural immunity offers cross-protection against not only the infecting strain, but other influenza strains as well, and evidently even against other viruses.

The Assault on Our Right to Informed Consent

The right to informed consent is one of the most fundamental ethics in medicine. In the wake of World War II and revelations about the Nazis’ use of humans for medical experimentation, the international community formally recognized informed consent as a fundamental human right. The Nuremberg Code established medical ethics principles starting with this: “The voluntary consent of the human subject is absolutely essential.”

This means, among other things, that the subject must be in a position “to be able to exercise free power of choice, without the intervention of any element of force, fraud, deceit, duress, overreaching, or other ulterior form of constraint or coercion”.

Additionally, the subject “should have sufficient knowledge and comprehension of the elements of the subject matter involved as to enable him to make an understanding and enlightened decision.”

The right to informed consent has also been codified in the 1966 United Nations International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, which states under Article 7 that “no one shall be subjected without his free consent to medical or scientific experimentation.”

The updated 2002 edition of the International Ethical Guidelines for Biomedical Research Involving Human Subjects—guidelines promulgated by the World Health Organization (WHO) and the Council for International Organizations of Medical Sciences—states that, “For all biomedical research involving humans the investigator must obtain the voluntary informed consent of the prospective subject or, in the case of an individual who is not capable of giving informed consent, the permission of a legally authorized representative….”

This right is also codified in the Universal Declaration on Bioethics and Human Rights, adopted at the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) in October 2005: “Any preventive, diagnostic and therapeutic medical intervention is only to be carried out with the prior, free and informed consent of the person concerned, based on adequate information…. Scientific research should only be carried out with the prior, free, express and informed consent of the person concerned. The information should be adequate, provided in a comprehensible form and should include modalities for withdrawal of consent….  In no case should a collective community agreement or the consent of a community leader or other authority substitute for an individual’s informed consent.” (Emphasis added.)

Yet substituting individual informed consent with state authority is precisely what the federal and state governments are doing when it comes to the practice of vaccination. When the state uses coercion to gain compliance, it constitutes an assault on this fundamental human right. Furthermore, neither medical professionals nor the major media are doing their duty by providing people with the knowledge they need to be able to make an informed choice, but instead are regurgitating deceitful vaccine propaganda to persuade or intimidate them into behaving as government bureaucrats would have them do.

The population is being bullied into compliance with dangerously shortsighted government diktats. Power hungry bureaucrats and technocrats treat vaccination as a one-size-fits-all solution despite great variability in individual risk both from the diseases the vaccines are designed to prevent and from the vaccines. They have no respect for individual rights or the doctor-patient relationship. California Senator Richard Pan, for example, considers doctors writing medical exemptions to state vaccine mandates as doing something that is “not the practice of medicine but of a state authority to licensed physicians”. Essentially, from his authoritarian perspective, “physicians are fulfilling an administrative role”. There is no room for informed consent. Doctors are not free to practice as they deem best for their patients, and informed consent for their patients is not an option.

But bureaucrats in Washington or state capitals simply do not have the knowledge required to be able to make that determination for other individuals. When it comes to our children, only the parents and their family doctor have the specialized knowledge of the child that is necessary to be able to do the individual risk-benefit analysis that required for informed consent.

Many who do choose willingly to comply with public policy do so because they unquestioningly believe the dogma they are told, that “vaccines are safe and effective”, and who therefore remain incapable of such a risk-benefit analysis. Not all vaccines are safe. Not all are effective. The risks and benefits are not the same for everyone. And the long-term unintended consequences need also to be considered.

Many others who are aware enough to question public policy still comply because there will be state retribution if they don’t. Informed consent is not happening. Consequently, public vaccine policy effectively treats the entire population as the subjects of a mass uncontrolled experiment with most people remaining unaware that they are being experimented upon by blind authoritarians trying to play God by controlling us.

It’s time for that to stop—and for mainstream journalists to start doing their jobs and reporting seriously on this critically important issue. The lives, health, and liberty of entire future generations of humanity are depending on it.

Robert F. Kennedy Jr Explains How Big Pharma Completely Owns Congress

Article from Virutron Research.

“Those of you who have been involved in the past in the battle to protect our children from poorly made vaccines or toxic chemicals in our food or in our water know the power of these industries and how they’ve undermined every institution in our democracy that is supposed to protect little children from powerful, greedy corporations. Even the pharmaceutical companies have been able to purchase congress. They’re the largest lobbying entity in Washington D.C.. They have more lobbyists in Washington D.C. than there are congressman and senators combined. They give twice to congress what the next largest lobbying entity is, which is oil and gas… Imagine the power they exercise over both republicans and democrats. They’ve captured them (our regulatory agencies) and turned them into sock puppets. They’ve compromised the press… and they destroy the publications that publish real science. ” – (Robert F. Kennedy Jr, from the video below)

Robert F. Kennedy Jr, Chairman of the Board of Directors for Children’s Health Defence (a worthy cause if you’re looking for one to donate to) has been fighting against big corporations that have taken over and undermined American government health regulatory agencies for a number of years. One of the most recent examples is when Robert F. Kennedy Jr represented Dewayne Johnson, a school groundskeeper who successfully brought forward a lawsuit alleging glyphosate caused his cancer. That’s right, he won!

There are currently thousands of cases pending against Monsanto, which is only one of multiple powerful companies influencing agencies like the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). And to think, these are the agencies providing us with ‘science’ in order to get the food, medications, and other products produced by these big corporations to be deemed safe. Not only that, but these agencies are providing educational resources to medical schools, which Big Pharma has completely taken over as well.

https://youtu.be/w9y-OTaJPOQ

It’s truly unbelievable that, in this day and age, education has turned into brainwashing. Science is corrupted, altered, changed, ignored, and swept under the rug just because it threatens the interests of a few powerful people and the corporations they hide behind.

It is simply no longer possible to believe much of the clinical research that is published, or to rely on the judgment of trusted physicians or authoritative medical guidelines. I take no pleasure in this conclusion, which I reached slowly and reluctantly over my two decades as an editor of The New England Journal of Medicine.”   Dr. Marcia Angell, a physician and longtime Editor-in-Chief of the New England Medical Journal (NEMJ) (source)

Glyphosate, the active ingredient in Monsanto’s pesticide Round Up, is a perfect example, as science has been showing for decades how incredibly harmful it is for human health and the environment, yet it’s approved as ‘safe’ for use in the western world. It’s no mystery why glyphosate is illegal in the majority of countries around the world. The same goes for genetically modified foods, which is what Round Up was designed to be used on. Years ago, a lawsuit forced the FDA to divulge its files on genetically engineered foods.

“As part of the process, they portrayed the various concerns as merely the ignorant opinions of misinformed individuals – and derided them as not only unscientific, but anti-science. They then set to work to convince the public and government officials, through the dissemination of false information, that there was an overwhelming expert consensus, based on solid evidence, that GMOs were safe.” – Jane Goodall

You can read more about that here.  You can also read more about the connection between GMOs and cancer as well as hundreds of scientists supporting the link here. Just like glyphosate, dozens of countries have cited health and environmental hazards for keeping GMOs out of their country.

In addition, Monsanto colluded with the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to stifle cancer research and any connections to their products. The European Union actually just approved the use of glyphosate, and their approval was found to be based on plagiarized science from Monsanto.

The corruption is never-ending when it comes to the link between corporations and government agencies. In fact, only a few years ago, more than a dozen scientists from within the CDC put out an anonymous public statement detailing the influence corporations have on government policies. They were referred to as the Spider Papers.

Dr. William Thompson is a longtime CDC scientist who has published some of the most commonly cited pro-vaccine studies, some of which claim that there is absolutely no link between the MMR vaccine and autism.  He pointed to a specific study that he co-authored in 2004 for the CDC, which claimed that “the measles-mumps-rubella vaccine does not cause autism or any particular subtypes of autism spectrum disorder.” This study is often cited when trying to justify the use of this vaccine, despite the fact that he later stated they deleted important findings from that study. He said that “it’s the lowest point in my career that I went along with that paper and uh, I went along with this, we didn’t report significant findings…  I’m completely ashamed of what I did, I have great shame now that I was complicit and went along with this. I have been a part of the problem.” (source)

Anxious to get this information out, Thompson sent various documents to Congressman Bill Posey, who addressed the congress, reading a statement that he had received from Dr. Thompson:

Sometime soon after the meeting, we decided to exclude reporting any race effects, the [CDC] co-authors scheduled a meeting to destroy documents related to the [MMR vaccine] study. The remaining four co-authors all met and brought a big garbage can into the meeting room and reviewed and went through all the hard copy documents that we had thought we should discard and put them in a huge garbage can. (source)

As you can see, there are no shortage of examples that highlight the collusion between corporations and government regulatory agencies.

The Takeaway

This information might come as a shock for some, and to those of you who are just waking up to this kind of thing, it’s really nothing to be scared about. This is simply important information to be aware of. Once you are aware, you can make more informed decisions and better choices in your own life. After all, who are the main resources for these big, misleading corporations? Us. We are the ones who use and support their products and keep the money flowing into their pockets. Without us, they are nothing, which is why awareness is so important.

Sure, there are mass brainwashing campaigns by these companies in an attempt to convince us that their propaganda is real, but more people are becoming aware and it’s spreading across the globe. This can’t go on forever, and compared to a couple of decades ago, so many more people were unaware. We’ve come a long way, and that’s a very positive thing.

Source: Collective Evolution

High Levels Of Aluminium Found In Autistic Brains

Prof. Christopher Exeley, Professor in Bioinorganic Chemistry at Keele University, has discovered that in the autistic people he studied of around 13, 14, and 15 years of age that "there (was) more aluminium than seen in any other circumstance" (detected in their bodies).

Professor Exeley states that his research career (1984-present) has focused upon an intriguing paradox; "How come the third most abundant element of the Earth's crust (aluminium) is non-essential and largely inimical to life?"

"I am also fascinated by the element silicon in relation to living things which, as the second most abundant element of the Earth's crust, is also almost devoid of biological function.

One possible function of silicon is to keep aluminium out of biology (biota) and this forms a large part of the research in our group. We are also interested in biological silicification."

Toxic aluminium found in alarmingly high amounts in the autistic brain.

"This is the first time in any human brain tissue we have seen this, this is a standout and unique observation in autism. For myself, it very much implicates aluminium in the ethology of autism. That doesn't mean aluminium causes it, but it means it's almost certainly playing a role in the disease."

"When we looked at people's brains with a diagnosis of autism, we found something that we have never seen yet in any other set of human brains. We found that the majority of aluminium was actually inside cells; intra-cellular. Some of it was inside neurons, but actually the majority of it was inside non-neuronal cell populations."

"So we found that these cells were heavily loaded with aluminium. We also found evidence that cells in the lymph and in the blood were passing into the brain. So they were carrying with them a cargo of aluminium from the body into the brain."

Most shockingly, this urgently needed study was not funded by any government, but by non-governmental philanthropy.

Autism, which is one of the major illnesses of our time, is not being actively studied in mainstream science.

Exeley stated in the interview that "no government funded this research, it came because of philanthropy, it came because of individuals who wanted to know answers and were prepared to use their own money."

"We pay our government, and our government should really be using our money to fund this type of research."

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cFW9w7wOxg8

They key difference to highlight is that when we ingest aluminium orally, it is subjected to our digestive tracts; and gets excreted rather than absorbed — as aluminium has no role in the human body.

When it is injected, aluminium bypasses our bodies' natural defenses, and lodges itself in tissues throughout the body, most notably the brain; which is a highly absorbent, 60% fat organ that sees high bloodflow compared to other areas of the body.

This means lots of resources are being transferred through the brain all the time, a blood-brain barrier is a natural way of keeping out unwanted substances and absorbing useful resources like oxygen, it is highly likely that an intravenous injection of toxic substances like aluminium may breach the blood-brain barrier and implicate toxicity.

This distinction is of toxicological significance — and implicates aluminium adjuvants in intravenously applied vaccines as something of serious concern.

Getting aluminium out of the body.

Silica has been found to reduce aluminum levels drastically in the body. It does this by binding with its molecules and extracting them out of brain cells and ultimately out of the body through urine and other means.

Ground-breaking research done by Dr. Exeley found that water high in silicic acid (oxygenated silica) had a positive effect on autistic children. Exeley has found that aluminum levels were lower in the children by 50 to 70 percent who drank this kind of water.

He then did the same study with Alzheimer’s Disease (AD) patients. After 13 weeks of drinking high-silica water, the same results were achieved. In the AD patients, eight out of fifteen no longer showed neurological deterioration and three showed “substantial cognitive increase.”

Dr. Exeley used Spritzer (a Malaysian bottled water) for the study, but other waters that contain high amounts of silica include Volvic and Fiji (Fiji comes in a BPA-free bottle). His suggested protocol for helping to remove aluminum from the brain is to consume 1.5 liters of high-silicic water for at least 5 days. He suggests drinking the entire 1.5 liters within an hour for the best results. Higher aluminum toxicity levels may require higher amount of water.

Diatomaceous earth (DE) is another great source of silica since it is made up mostly of the substance. Diatomaceous earth is actually millions of tiny, fossilized aquatic microorganism called “diatoms” that are ground up into a fine, white powder. Besides aluminum detoxification, DE also chelates other heavy metals, helps with GI health, and can give you more energy.

In addition to high-silicic acid waters and DE, cucumbers, bananas, bentonite clay, and horsetail herb also contain high amounts of silica.

Add at least one of the following nutritional substances to your diet every day. All of these not only have the ability to detox the body from heavy metals, but are also neuroprotectants and immune system boosters:

• Cold pressed unrefined organic coconut oil


• Chia and flaxseed


• Milk thistle


• Vitamin C (and foods rich in this vitamin)


• Spirulina and chlorella


• Foods such as garlic, cilantro, and parsley that can help eliminate heavy metals such as aluminum and mercury from your body


• Fresh, filtered water (and plenty of it!)


• Carbon 60, may chelate metals in the safest way currently known.


• The Andy Cutler Protocol, which is also a safer way of chelating metals from the brain and body.

Autism Epidemic: The Hyper-Masculinization Theory

Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD) is more prevalent now than ever before, it's a topic rarely discussed — in previous articles I have put forward several theories as to the cause of the illness; including but not limited to exposure to toxins in pharmaceutical vaccines, the genetic and gender roles in the origins of the illness, environmental traumas, prenatal exposure to hostile chemical agents, and so on.

[caption id="attachment_16320" align="aligncenter" width="738"] Autism has skyrocketed. The mainstream media and the medical establishment have attributed this to 'greater rates of diagnosis' and a more comprehensive understanding of autism as a condition - I disagree with this poor explanation; autism is very noticeable and identifiable.[/caption]

As a disclaimer, and to distinguish — autism has numerous manifest forms; generally recognized in problems with social communication and social interaction, and/or restricted, repetitive patterns of behavior, interests or activities — there are numerous hues of the "autistic" profile, as per the varying extent of the condition's causative effects.

Endocrine disruptors are likely having a major role in the onset of autistic spectrum's symptoms in people. Endocrine disruptors are chemicals that may mimic and interfere with the body’s chemical messenger system (endocrine system) and produce adverse developmental, reproductive, neurological, and immune effects in both humans and wildlife — hormones, besides DNA, are directly responsible for what we are, physically, mentally, and emotionally.

Our hormones can make us more masculine or more feminine, decide where our bodies should build muscle, fat, affect our gynecology, alter the structure and thought processes of our brains; dictate our personalities, our behavior, our very perception of the world around us — the list is endless, this is crucial in understanding autism as an illness and how it manifests.

There is a growing recognition that even small amounts of endocrine-disrupting chemicals can have a deleterious affect on the development of the fetus, infants and young children.

All in all, most of these "autistic" profiles, any way you look at them, are extremely damaging to the fabric of our society (no, autism is not healthy or natural) and can be pinned to a few common likely causes.

On pharmaceutical vaccines, chronic immune system dysregulation:

A common argument against people who are skeptical of or criticize vaccines is that vaccines are the "magic bullet" to our health and wellbeing, that without vaccines we'd all die in some horrendous plague. This is patently false. Vaccines, like anything we put into our bodies, should be questioned and scrutinized.

Epidemiological studies (statistical surveys) show poorer long-term health is more common among the vaccinated who survive without serious injury than children who are not vaccinated — this condition is termed "vaccinosis". (1, 2, 3, 4).

Gian Paolo Vanoli, a scientist, journalist and opponent of vaccinations, says that vaccines make people gay. This is one just account of the detrimental hormonal influences of vaccines.

Vaccines only engage part of the immune system, they intravenously introduce pathogens; a way the body cannot manufacture a proper adaptive response, the result is autoimmune disorders. In cases of immune system over activity, the body attacks and damages its own tissues (autoimmune diseases). Heightened body inflammation over a vaccinosis sufferers' life results in numerous illnesses.

When people are subject to repeated vaccines, they predictably simulate a situation of suppressed cell-mediated immunity and heightened antibody responses. Why? Because that’s the goal of vaccination. If you make a list of the diseases that are characterized by suppressed cell-mediated immunity and heightened humoral immunity, you’re talking health conditions like asthma, allergies, eczema and autoimmune diseases including Crohn’s, Vitiligo, Multiple Sclerosis, Sjogren’s syndrome, Hashimoto’s, etcetera.

We cannot and will not eradicate all disease with vaccines. We have merely traded acute illnesses from which most recover for chronic illnesses for which modern medicine has no cure.

[caption id="attachment_16326" align="aligncenter" width="640"] It's become increasingly apparent that vaccines turn the guns of immune defense inwards.[/caption]

• In a 1997 study in New Zealand, 1265 children were surveyed: twenty-three percent of the vaccinated children experienced asthma and thirty percent suffered from allergies. The unvaccinated children did not have a single incident of these illnesses.


• In a 2004 British Study of 30,000 children, vaccinated children had a 5.04 increased risk of asthma, while the unvaccinated only had a .36 percent prevalence.


• In a 2011 German Study of 8000 children, vaccinated children had at least two to five times more diseases and disorders than unvaccinated children.

In patients with an autoimmune disorder, the immune system can’t tell the difference between healthy body tissue and antigens that need to be attacked. The result is an immune response that destroys normal body tissues. This response is a hypersensitivity reaction similar to the response in allergic conditions. Vaccinations have been shown to induce autoimmune disorders.

Interestingly, there’s a study out of Kobe University in Japan where they took mice and put them on a rigorous vaccination program. They wanted to see if they could develop excessive antibodies as seen in autoimmune disease. And they found that at a certain threshold they could consistently and reliably induce autoimmune disease by simply giving enough vaccinations. (source)

This vaccine-induced autoimmune disease may explain the onset of autism in some people who are genetically susceptible or otherwise. Is autism an autoimmune disorder? Most likely.

The Kobe University study authors concluded:

"Systemic autoimmunity appears to be the inevitable consequenceof over-stimulating the host’s immune ‘system’ by repeated immunization with antigen to the levels that surpass the system’s self-organize criticality."

In other words, they found that, not only is vaccination a possible or even probable cause of autoimmune disorders, but that chronic diseases are the inevitable result of vaccinations!

This study was done with mice. This begs the question, ‘Has this been replicated in humans?’ Unequivocally yes. This experiment has been done and it’s called the last 70 years.

Autoimmune diseases have increased in quantity and variety as the number of vaccinations has increased over the last 70 years. There are over 100 autoimmune diseases. Studies with monogenetic twins have revealed that genetic influences only account for 25–40% of the disease risk making environmental influences the predominant factors. (7) Regardless of genetic vulnerability, one’s environment determines whether genes for autoimmunity are expressed.

There is a reason the fastest growing subset of diseases in the US and the world are autoimmune diseases. This is because we’re producing them. It’s a growth industry. As vaccines have increased in number, so have the number of cases of autoimmune disease.

Currently, there are 38 vaccines on the recommended schedule, with even more in some US states. There are many more vaccines in development. I predict a worsening epidemic of allergies, asthma, autoimmune and other diseases caused by an atrophy of the cell-mediated immune response as more vaccines are added to the vaccine schedule. We are only seeing the tip of the iceberg with vaccine-induced disease.

In vulnerable children, vaccines cause autism, seizures, mental retardation and so many other health issues. One must also take into account the fact that for every severe reaction, vaccine provoke less acute effects like confusion, language difficulties, memory issues, irritability, mood alterations, combativeness, difficulty concentrating and behavioral problems. (source). This sounds very much like ADD and ADHD, which are sweeping the child population in epidemic proportions.

Read more at MyersDetox.

Sources for information on vaccines:

1. Drtenpenny.com


2. Vaccineresearchlibrary.com


3. Novaccine.com


4. 909shot.com


5. Thinktwice.com


6. Nvic.org (National Vaccine Information Center)


7. Vaccinetruth.org


8. Vran.org (excellent Canadian site)


9. Childhoodshots.com

The Hyper-Masculinization Theory

The 2004 book by Simon Baron-Cohen called "Prenatal Testosterone in Mind: Amniotic Fluid Studies" and his 2003 book "The Essential Difference: Men, Women and the Extreme Male Brain", dives into the role gestational endocrinology might have in influencing human minds, personalities and behavioral profiles.

One emerging theory suggests that autism may have something to do with high exposure to adverse hormonal influences in the womb — in effect interfering with the child's otherwise stable development — and pushing their cognitive profile to become overly systemic, or at least inhibiting the formation of a healthy cognitive profile — the result seems to be an augmentation of the structured and logical male brain. A personality style guided overly by systems and order.

Slightly elevated levels of testosterone in fetuses have been linked to health defects and autism, and that autism-type disorders are four to nine times more common in boys.

Research indicates that mercury and aluminum components of vaccines may have synergistic toxicity with testosterone, which causes the autistic symptoms to emerge. It's not surprising when you consider the rise of autism came in the 1930s when ethyl mercury was first commercialized in agricultural products and in vaccines.

To address people who claim that mercury isn't in vaccines anymore; it’s simply not true that they’ve removed the mercury exposure from infant and fetal vaccines. Mercury has come out of some vaccines. It’s still in others, and they’ve targeted pregnant women with flu shots, and ethyl mercury in pregnancy is even more toxic in pregnancy than it is in infancy. Also, injected substances are more toxic than conventionally ingested substances. Mercury you consume orally is less of a danger than injected mercury.

Like it or not, vaccines are likely the largest source of one-time exposure to endocrine-disrupting chemicals in early infant development that may be responsible for these marginal fetal hormone-altering effects.

Natal and post-natal vaccinations are the only common logical stages wherein hormonal interference can take hold in a big way and change the biological course of someone's life permanently.

Preterm delivery	4.7 times higher
Clear-cell adenocarcinoma	40 times higher
Neonatal death	8 times higher
Loss in second trimester pregnancy	3.8 times higher
Ectopic pregnancy	3.7 times higher
Stillbirth	2.4 times higher
Infertility	2.4 times higher
Early menopause	2.4 times higher
Breast cancer	1.8 times higher

For example, considering autism has been linked to testosterone, with boys having the condition far more than girls (at 80% of ASD cases being males), one study has shown that people with autism have more masculine facial structures than the average neurotypical person, pointing towards higher testosterone as a link.

A paper published in 2015 also found adults (both men and women) with higher prenatal testosterone had more masculine facial features, and that this is the group most likely to have the neurological profile known as autism.

The testosterone connection deepens, the lack of emotional intelligence in autistic people could be linked to the hyper-masculinisation associated with testosterone's empathy-reducing effects on the brain — healthy men should have less empathy than women but should still have an emotional side; testosterone makes us more individualistic and antagonistic, hyper-masculinisation could push this to extremes. This capacity to empathize conventionally typically seems to be less prevalent in autistic people.

The hyper-specific interests of many autistic people perhaps alludes to the wiring of the archetypal male brain; the ability to focus on an objective and be undeterred by other interfering thought processes.

The effect on the autistic person's emotional quotient seems to vary between overly sensitive and emotionally unpredictable, to overly systemic and rigid, or a combination of both, or a slight effect of any of these symptoms in the partial autistic condition known as Asperger syndrome. Interestingly, it seems to more commonly go the way of this hyper-systematized personality, though.

Returning to the testosterone link, the UWA research associate Syed Zulqarnain Gilani and his team developed a technique where 3-D photogrammetry — the science of making measurements from photographs — could score a face to be male or female, based on 11 facial features.

"First, we looked for features that distinguished between male and female," Zulqarnain says.

"We found the autistic boys and girls had significantly more masculine gender scores than the non-autistic subjects."

The study also found the more masculine the face, the more social communication difficulties the children in the ASD group had.

Pesticides could play a role in the autism epidemic.

Another study showed how elevated levels of a metabolite of the insecticide DDT in the blood of pregnant women are linked to increased risk for autism in the offspring.

The investigators found the odds of autism with intellectual disability in offspring were increased by greater than twofold for the mother's DDE levels in the top quartile.



Dr. Stephanie Seneff, when asked “is there a toxic substance that is currently in our environment on the rise in step with increasing rates of autism that could explain this?” Seneff responded; “The answer is yes, I’m quite sure that I’m right, and the answer is glyphosate.” — This glyphosate is the active ingredient in RoundUp, a product made by Monsanto, which ranks as the number one herbicide used worldwide.

Russia looks to become top producer and exporter of organic food with President Vladimir Putin recently signing a new law regulating production, storing and transportation of organic produce in Russia. The decree bans agrochemicals, pesticides, antibiotics growth stimulators and hormones. Many countries have banned or are taking steps to ban glyphosate use, and move to cleaner foods.

Pregnancy is a delicate process that cannot be interrupted.

During pregnancy the hormonal levels of the mother are in flux, it's a phase in which her body is carefully assembling new life in the womb.

Natal vaccines, such as the flu jab, cause a shock to the system that changes the hormonal profile of the pregnant mother, the developing child takes the biggest hit.

Did I mention that a stunning finding revealed that autism is highest in areas with the highest vaccination rates? Correlation or causation?

Vaccines and pesticides also have a endocrine-disrupting effect on the gestating mother's child, the evidence supports this:

For example, in 2004, Alan Cantwell, M.D. raised concerns that 74 million children in Africa were discovered to be contaminated with a variety of female sex hormones, and that the injection of these was linked to an increase of sterility. Estradiol (E2), also spelled oestradiol, is an estrogen steroid hormone and the major female sex hormone, what is it doing in vaccines? — without a doubt I would link this to the rise in autism, homosexuality and gender-queerness.

The formative development of a person, involving the early biological emergence of a person's distinct gender is an especially susceptible phase to disruption.

Aluminium and mercury, toxic adjuvants present in some vaccines are well-known potent endocrine disruptors. It's no wonder many autistic kids show the signs of hormonal abnormality in their facial structure, as already mentioned - and that's just the one's that show an outward sign, it's likely most have these irregularities but they may not be as outwardly noticeable.

Tyrone Hayes, University of CA professor was asked to study a chemical called atrazine, a widely-used herbicide manufactured by Syngenta. He found unexpected results: that it causes sexual abnormality in frogs and that it could potentially cause the same effects in humans (frogs changing from male to female). Herbicides like atrazine are detectable on and in most food — including food eaten by pregnant mothers and transferred to unborn babies.

Vaccines with heavy metals and viruses that cause inflammation, pesticides and any other similarly unnoticeable agents — the hormonal profile of the gestating mother will be forced to change to deal with the hostility, it looks like this may be at the expense of the fetus' health — in nature, the mother's body takes precedence over the unborn child, the mother's body is the crucial supply line. For example, Dr. Deepak Chopra has claimed that hundreds of studies have confirmed that chemicals released by the pregnant mother's body are transported into the womb and affect the unborn baby.

The start of the autism epidemic correlates closely with the phased introduction of the Hib vaccine plus the HepB vaccine in the late 1980’s/early 1990’s. At that time, both the Hib and the HepB contained high amounts of mercury and aluminum which significantly increased the exposure to infants to both of these toxic chemicals at a far earlier age than ever before (HepB: at birth and then 1-2, 4, and 6 months; Hib: 2, 4, and 6 months).

Although mercury has been reduced or removed in some vaccines since 2003, mercury is still a component in most flu vaccines. The number of infant vaccines with aluminum-based adjuvants administered by 18 months of age has increased by 54% since 2000, and the amount of aluminum administered has increased by 23%.

In an article for Mothering Magazine, Dr. Bob Sears warned about the aluminum content found in infant vaccines:

In other words, a newborn who gets a Hepatitis B injection on day one of life would receive 250 mcg of aluminum. This would be repeated at one month with the next Hep B shot. When, at two months, a baby gets its first big round of shots, the total dose of aluminum could vary from 295 mcg (if a non-aluminum HIB and the lowest-aluminum brand of DTaP are used) to a whopping 1225 mcg (if the Hep B vaccine is given along with the brands with the highest aluminum contents). These doses are repeated at four and six months. With most subsequent rounds of shots, a child would continue to get some aluminum throughout the first two years. But the FDA recommends that premature babies, and anyone with impaired kidney function, receive no more than 10 to 25 mcg of injected aluminum at any one time.

So there's how it is; aluminum and mercury are both endocrine disruptors, as well as neurotoxins, and both can be particularly toxic when exposed to testosterone — is someone targeting men by needlessly putting these substances in vaccines? Of course.

There is no end to the tricks that endocrine disruptors can play on our bodies: increasing production of certain hormones; decreasing production of others; imitating hormones; turning one hormone into another; interfering with hormone signaling; telling cells to die prematurely; competing with essential nutrients; binding to essential hormones; accumulating in organs that produce hormones.

Vaccines may cause the immune system to attack itself.

In what is called an autoimmune response — the fact aborted fetal cells are included in vaccines means the body could see healthy cells as hostile and then engage in self-destructive behavior.

Here is a video that suggests that nagalase is intentionally put into vaccines to weaken the immune system. Dr. Bradstreet found that autistic children tended to have a highly elevated level of nagalase in their blood. He claimed to have tested over 400 autistic children for the viral marker nagalase, and found that close to 80% of them had significantly elevated levels. This would make sense as part of a dumbing down and depopulation agenda as described in THRIVE (at 1:33:55). Bradstreet treated 1,100 patients with GcMAF, with an 85% response rate.

“GcMAF and/or oral Colostrum MAF macrophage activation therapy is indicated in the treatment of any diseases where there is immune dysfunction or where the immune system is compromised,” explains the website of a clinic out of Japan that sells an oral form of GcMAF.

Here’s a diagram of how GcMAF works:

What is GcMAF useful for?

One of the things that GcMAF does is kill a protein made by all cancer cells called nagalase, which is excreted by cancer cells to disarm the human immune system. Nagalase causes immunodeficiency

Besides cancer, the conditions listed as appropriate candidates for benefit from GcMAF treatment include:

Autoimmune diseases Epstein-Barr Virus (EBV) Hepatitis B virus (HBV) Herpes Simplex virus (HSV) Cystitis Hepatitis C virus (HCV) Multiple sclerosis (MS) Urinary tract infection (UTI) Autism Spectrum Disorders (ASD) Rheumatoid arthritis (RA) Endometriosis Chronic Fatigue Syndrome (CFS) Lyme disease (Lyme borreliosis) IgA deficiency disorder Myalgic Encephalomyelitis (ME) Mycobacteria infections Parkinson’s disease Tuberculosis Fibromyalgia Human papillomavirus (HPV)

Lupus (Systemic lupus erythematosus, SLE) HIV AIDS Dengue fever Pneumonia infection Warts caused by viral infection Norovirus Malaria Influenza virus (flu) Herpes simplex virus (HSV) Q fever (Coxiella burnetii) Polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS) Chicken pox (varicella zoster virus) Psoriasis Respiratory tract infections Ulcerative colitis Crohn’s disease Type 1 diabetes (T1DM) Insulin-dependent diabetes (IDDM) Type 1.5 diabetes Latent autoimmune diabetes of adults (LADA)

GcMAF is also showing itself to be effective for treating autism.

“In a study of 1500 children with autism, 85% had high levels of viruses and a compromised immune system. All 1500 received weekly GcMAF injections and 70% of the children responded to the treatment with reduced symptoms and another 15% made full recoveries. The other 15% did not respond. It was stated that the reduction of autistic symptoms is permanent provided that GcMAF has been taken long enough for the body to produce its own GcMAF which typically takes 24 weeks.”

I personally know individuals who have been dramatically helped by taking GcMAF. Marco Ruggerio delivered a paper at the AutismOne conference in May of 2015 — just before these murders started. Over the summer, patients who were using it had their supplies cut off from their original source in Switzerland where the company was being harassed and threatened. Subsequent shipments from another country were intercepted at the U.S. border, though eventually allowed through. Authorities in the UK have also been confiscating this beneficial compound.

Introducing foreign bodies via vaccination to instill a state of inflammation.

Text from James A. Miller

During the early 1990s, the World Health Organization (WHO) has been
overseeing massive vaccination campaigns against tetanus in a number
of countries, among them Nicaragua, Mexico, and the Philippines. In
October 1994, HLI received a communication from its Mexican
affiliate, the Comite Pro Vida de Mexico, regarding that country's
anti-tetanus campaign. Suspicious of the campaign protocols, the
Comite obtained several vials of the vaccine and had them analyzed by
chemists. Some of the vials were found to contain human chorionic
gonadotrophin (hCG), a naturally occurring hormone essential for
maintaining a pregnancy.

hCG and anti-hCG antibodies.

In nature the hCG hormone alerts the women's body that she is
pregnant and causes the release of other hormones to prepare the
uterine lining for the implantation of the fertilized egg. The rapid
rise in hCG levels after conception makes it an excellent marker for
confirmation of pregnancy: when a woman takes a pregnancy test she is
not tested for the pregnancy itself, but for the elevated presence of
hCG.

However, when introduced into the body coupled with a tetanus toxoid
carrier, antibodies will be formed not only against tetanus but also
against hCG. In this case the body fails to recognize hCG as a friend
and will produce anti-hCG antibodies. These antibodies will attack
subsequent pregnancies by killing the hCG which naturally sustains a
pregnancy; when a woman has sufficient anti-hCG antibodies in her
system, she is rendered incapable of maintaining a pregnancy.[1]

HLI reported the sketchy facts regarding the Mexican tetanus vaccines
to its World Council members and affiliates in more than 60
countries.[2] Soon additional reports of vaccines laced with hCG
hormones began to drift in from the Philippines, where more than 3.4
million women were recently vaccinated. Similar reports came from
Nicaragua, which had conducted its own vaccination campaign in 1993.

The known facts.

Here are the known facts concerning the tetanus vaccination campaigns
in Mexico and the Philippines:

* Only women are vaccinated, and only the women between the ages of
15 and 45. (In Nicaragua the age range was 12-49). But aren't men at
least as likely as young women to come into contact with tetanus? And
what of the children? Why are they excluded?

* Human chorionic gonadotrophin (hCG) hormone has been found in the
vaccines. It does not belong there -in the parlance of the O.J.
Simpson murder trial, the vaccine has been "contaminated."

* The vaccination protocols call for multiple injections-three within
three months and a total of five altogether. But, since tetanus
vaccinations provide protection for ten years or more, why are
multiple inoculations called for?[3]

* WHO has been actively involved for more than 20 years in the
development of an anti-fertility vaccine utilizing hCG tied to
tetanus toxoid as a carrier-the exact same coupling as has been found
in the Mexican-Philippine-Nicaragua vaccines.[4]

The anti-fertility gang.

Allied with the WHO in the development of an anti-fertility vaccine
(AFV) using hCG with tetanus and other carriers have been UNFPA, the
UN Development Programme (UNDP), the World Bank, the Population
Council, the Rockefeller Foundation, the All India Institute of
Medical Sciences, and a number of universities, including Uppsala,
Helsinki, and Ohio State.[5] The U.S. National Institute of Child
Health and Human Development (part of NIH) was the supplier of the
hCG hormone in some of the AFV experiments.[6]

The WHO began its "Special Programme" in human reproduction in 1972,
and by 1993 had spent more than $356 million on "reproductive health"
research.[7] It is this "Programme" which has pioneered the
development of the abortificant vaccine. Over $90 million of this
Programme's funds were contributed by Sweden; Great Britain donated
more than $52 million, while Norway, Denmark and Germany kicked in
for $41 million, $27 million, and $12 million, respectively. The
U.S., thanks to the cut-off of such funding during the Reagan-Bush
administrations, has contributed "only" $5.7 million, including a new
payment in 1993 by the Clinton administration of $2.5 million. Other
major contributors to the WHO Programme include UNFPA, $61 million;
the World Bank, $15.5 million; the Rockefeller Foundation, $2.5
million; the Ford Foundation, over $1 million; and the IDRC
(International Research and Development Centre of Canada), $716.5
thousand.

WHO and Philippine Health Department excuses.

When the first reports surfaced in the Philippines of tetanus toxoid
vaccine being laced with hCG hormones, the WHO and the Philippine
Department of Health (DOH) immediately denied that the vaccine
contained hCG. Confronted with the results of laboratory tests which
detected its presence in three of the four vials of tetanus toxoid
examined, the WHO and DOH scoffed at the evidence coming from
"right-to-life and Catholic" sources. Four new vials of the tetanus
vaccine were submitted by DOH to St. Luke's (Lutheran) Medical
Center in Manila-and all four vials tested positive for hCG!

From outright denial the stories now shifted to the allegedly
"insignificant" quantity of the hCG present; the volume of hCG
present is insufficient to produce anti-hCG antibodies.

But new tests designed to detect the presence of hCG antibodies in
the blood sera of women vaccinated with the tetanus toxoid vaccine
were undertaken by Philippine pro- life and Catholic groups. Of
thirty women tested subsequent to receiving tetanus toxoid vaccine,
twenty-six tested positive for high levels of anti-hCG antibodies! If
there were no hCG in the vaccine, or if it were present in only
"insignificant" quantities, why were the vaccinated women found to be
harboring anti-hCG antibodies? The WHO and the DOH had no answers.

New arguments surfaced: hCG's apparent presence in the vaccine was
due to "false positives" resulting from the particular substances
mixed in the vaccine or in the chemicals testing for hCG. And even if
hCG was really there, its presence derived from the manufacturing
process.

But the finding of hCG antibodies in the blood sera of vaccinated
women obviated the need to get bogged down in such debates. It was no
longer necessary to argue about what may or may not have been the
<cause> of the hCG presence, when one now had the <effect> of the
hCG. There is no known way for the vaccinated women to have hCG
antibodies in their blood unless hCG had been artificially introduced
into their bodies!

Why a tetanus toxoid "carrier"?

Because the human body does not attack its own naturally occurring
hormone hCG, the body has to be fooled into treating hCG as an
invading enemy in order to develop a successful antifertility vaccine
utilizing hCG antibodies. A paper delivered at the 4th International
Congress of Reproductive Immunology (Kiel, West Germany, 2629 July
1989) spelled it out: "Linkage to a carrier was done to overcome the
immunological tolerance to hCG."[8]

Vaccine untested by Drug Bureau.

After the vaccine controversy had reached a fever pitch, a new
bombshell exploded: none of the three different brands of tetanus
vaccine being used had ever been licensed for sale and distribution
or registered with the Philippine Bureau of Food and Drugs (BFAD), as
required by law. The head of the BAFD lamely explained that the
companies distributing these brands "did not apply for
registration."[9] The companies in question are Connaught
Laboratories Ltd. and Intervex, both from Canada, and CSL
Laboratories from Australia.

It seemed that the BAFD might belatedly require re-testing, but the
idea was quickly rejected when the Secretary of Health declared that,
since the vaccines had been certified by the WHO -there they are
again!-there was assurance enough that the "vaccines come from
reputable manufacturers."[10]

Just how "reputable" one of the manufacturers might be is open to
some question. In the mid-'80s Connaught Laboratories was found to
be knowingly distributing vials of AIDS-contaminated blood
products.[11]

Epilogue.

At this juncture, evidence is beginning to appear from Africa.[12]
HLI has called for a Congressional investigation of the situation,
inasmuch as nearly every agency involved in the development of an
anti-fertility vaccine is funded, at least in part, with U.S.
monies.

ENDNOTES.

1 "Abortifacient vaccines loom as new threat," <HLI Reports>,
November 1993, pp. 1-2.

2 <World Council Reports>, 28 November 1994, pp. 4-5.

3 A call placed by this writer on 5 May 1995 to the Montgomery County
(Maryland) Health Department, Epidemology Division-Infectious
Diseases - Adult Immunizations, elicited the following information:

Q. For how long a time does the tetanus vaccination offer protection?

A. 10 years.

Q. Have you ever heard of any adult requiring three tetanus
vaccinations within a 3 or 4 month time period, and a total of 5
vaccinations in all within a year or so?

A. Whaaaat! Never. No way!

Reports from the Philippines appear to confirm the 10-year immunity
afforded by tetanus toxoid vaccinations: prior to the campaigns begun
in 1993, the so-called booster shots were given only every 10-years.

4 More than a score of articles, many written by WHO researchers,
document WHO's attempts to create an anti-fertility vaccine utilizing
tetanus toxoid as a carrier. Some leading articles include:

"Clinical profile and Toxicology Studies on Four Women Immunized with
Pr-B-hCG- TT," <Contraception>, February, 1976, pp. 253-268.

"Observations on the antigenicity and clinical effects of a candidate
antipregnancy vaccine: ,B-subunit of human chorionic gonadotropin
linked to tetanus toxoid," <Fertility and Sterility>, October 1980,
pp. 328-335

"Phase I Clinical Trials of a World Health Organization Birth Control
Vaccine," <The Lancet>, 11 June 1988, pp. 1295-1298. "Vaccines for
Fertility Regulation," Chapter 11, pp. 177-198, <Research in Human
Reproduction, Biennial Report> (1986-1987), WHO Special Programme of
Research, Development and Research Training in Human Reproduction
(WHO, Geneva 1988).

"Anti-hCG Vaccines are in Clinical Trials," <Scandinavian Journal of
Immunology>, Vol. 36, 1992, pp. 123-126.

5 These institutional names are garnered from the journal articles
cited in the previous footnote.

6 <Lancet>, 11 June 1988, at p. 1296.

7 <Challenges in Reproductive Health Research, Biennial Report
1992-1993>, World Health Organization, Geneva, 1994, p. 186.

8 G.P. Talwar, et al, "Prospects of an anti-hCG vaccine inducing
antibodies of high affinity...(etc)," <Reproductive Technology> 1989,
Elsevier Science Publishers, 1990, Amsterdam, New York, p. 231.

9 3 DOH vaccines untested by BFAD," <The Philippine Star>, 4 April
1995, pp. 1, 12.

10 "BFAD junks re-testing of controversial shot," <Manila Standard> 7
April 1995; "DOH: Toxoid vaccines are safe," <The Philippine Star>. 7
April 1995.

11 "Ottawa got blood tainted by HIV." <Ottawa Citizen>, 4 April 1995.

12 A nearly two-year old communique from Tanzania tells a familiar
story: tetanus toxoid vaccinations, five in all, given only to women
aged 1545. Nigeria, too, may have been victimized; see <The Lancet>,
4 June 1988, p. 1273.
Taken from the June/July 1995 issue of "HLI Reports." To subscribe
contact: HLI Reports, 7845 Airpark Road, Suite E Gaithersburg, MD
20879