- Pacific
Many "scientific" studies are literally nonsense. This is not a conspiracy
theory. For example, the Journal of the American Medical Association
[2005;294(2):218–28] published a paper showing that one-third of "highly cited
original clinical research studies" were eventually contradicted by subsequent
studies. The supposed effects of specific interventions either did not exist as the
original studies concluded, or were exaggerated. It is not unusual for the
"science" of today to degenerate into tomorrow's fiction.
Vaccine studies are often funded by vaccine manufacturers. The lead authors of important studies that
will be used to validate the safety
or efficacy of a vaccine are often beholden to the manufacturer in some way. They may own
stock in the company or are paid by the manufacturer to travel around the country
promoting their vaccines. Lead
authors may receive consultation fees, grants or other benefits from the drug maker. Although
many people consider this unethical or corrupt, in the world of immunizations this is an
acceptable practice, condoned by the CDC
and FDA.
Sometimes study conclusions contradict core data in the study. It is not uncommon to read
the abstract or summary of a major paper
touting a vaccine's apparent safety or benefits, only to find that upon examining the
actual paper, including important details, the vaccine is shown to be dangerous and may
have poor efficacy as well. For example, a landmark study published in Pediatrics
[2003;112:1039-48] found that cumulative exposure to thimerosal-containing vaccines
"resulted in a significant positive association with tics" and "increased
risks of language delay."
In other words, babies that received two or more vaccines containing mercury showed signs of neurological
damage. This crucial information
can be found in the body of the study. However, the authors concluded that "No
consistent significant associations were found between thimerosal-containing vaccines and
neurodevelopmental outcomes." Sadly, the media is reluctant to publish anything that
challenges the sacrosanct vaccine program. Newspaper articles about vaccines, and reviews
of vaccine studies that are published, merely mimic the original spurious conclusions.
Often, important information is missing from a study. For example, the New England
Journal of Medicine [2007;356:1915-27] published a paper on the HPV vaccine. It concluded that the
vaccine "was highly effective" even though data in the study showed that vaccine
efficacy was just 17% against high-grade cervical lesions. However, truly vital
information that would help families to make informed vaccine decisions was never
mentioned in the paper.
A secret FDA study [VRBPAC Meeting: May
18, 2006] had already found that the HPV vaccine may "enhance cervical disease" in girls who are sexually
active prior to vaccination. In other words, the vaccine seems to work best in virgins and
may actually increase a young woman's chance of developing cervical cancer if she was previously exposed
through sexual intercourse to HPV strains included in the vaccine.
In some instances, study results may be preordained. For example, when the vaccine-autism
link became a public concern, vaccine proponents hastened to produce authentic-appearing
studies that contradicted genuine data. Years ago, tobacco companies used this very same
ploy. They financed numerous bogus studies ostensibly "proving" that cigarettes
didn't cause cancer. The real studies got lost in the muddle. Sadly, it's all too easy to
obfuscate truth and deceive the public.
At the infamous Simpsonwood conference held in Norcross, Georgia [June 2000], CDC and FDA
authorities knew that mercury in vaccines was damaging children. They had irrefutable proof:
a comprehensive study conducted by the CDC itself. However, instead of making this
important information public, they hatched a plan to produce additional
"studies" that denied such a link. In fact, vaccine proponents had the audacity
to claim in some of these papers that mercury in vaccines not only doesn't hurt children
but that it actually benefits them! In the topsy-turvy world of overreaching vaccine
authorities, the well-documented neurotoxic chemical mercury somehow makes children
smarter and more functional, improving cognitive development and motor skills. Of
course, this is nonsense. Numerous real studies document mercury's destructive effect on
brain development and behavior.
Another ploy used by vaccine proponents is to design studies comparing vaccinated people
to other vaccinated people. Honest studies would compare them to an unvaccinated
population. In addition, vaccine control groups rarely receive a true placebo, which should be a harmless
substance. The scientific method has always been predicated upon removing all potentially
confounding influences. However, many vaccine studies do not conform to this integral
component of valid research. This
is an important concept to grasp. For example, when a new vaccine is being tested for
safety, one group may receive the new vaccine which contains an attenuated virus and an aluminum adjuvant while the
"control" group receives an injection of aluminum as well (rather than water or
another harmless substance). When vaccines are compared in this way, that is, to other
substances that are capable of causing adverse reactions, the vaccine appears safer than
it really is. Whenever this deceptive tactic is utilized, officially acknowledged adverse
reactions to a vaccine may represent only a fraction of the true potential risks to the
recipient.
It should also be noted that some clinical studies that are used to license vaccines
exclude people in certain groups. For example, they may be too young, too old, pregnant,
ill, or have other preexisting health ailments. However, once the vaccine is licensed, it
may be recommended for people in these groups. Much like using false placebos, this
unethical practice artificially inflates the vaccine's safety profile and places more
people at risk for adverse reactions.
Although some studies are mere propaganda, part of a larger disinformation campaign
designed to promote a vaccine agenda, other studies link vaccines to debilitating and
fatal diseases. For example, the British Medical Journal [1999;319:1133.] and Autoimmunity
[2002;35(4):247-53] published data correlating the haemophilus influenzae type b (Hib)
vaccine to rising rates of type 1 diabetes. The hepatitis B vaccine has been linked to
autoimmune and neurological disorders. Guillain-Barre syndrome -- a serious paralytic
disease -- is a well-known adverse reaction to the flu vaccine. These are just a few of the
many scientifically documented correlations between vaccines and incapacitating ailments
that I will discuss in upcoming articles.
To learn more about vaccines, read the Vaccine Safety Manual: www.VacBook.com and visit the Thinktwice
Global Vaccine Institute: www.ThinkTwice.com
- (1.26.2011, Neil Z. Miller) http://www.naturalnews.com/031113_vaccines_science.html
"To Achieve World
Government it is necessary to remove from the minds of men their individualism,
their loyalty to family traditions and national identification" Brock Chisholm - Director of the World Health Organization
"A society whose citizens refuse to see and investigate the facts, who refuse to
believe that their government and their media will routinely lie to them and fabricate a
reality contrary to verifiable facts, is a society that chooses and deserves the Police
State Dictatorship it's going to
get." Ian Williams Goddard
The fact is that "political correctness" is all about creating uniformity. Individualism is one of the biggest obstacles in the way of the New World Order. They want a public that is predictable and conditioned to do as it's told without asking questions.
"The two enemies of the people are criminals and government, so let us tie the second down with the chains of the Constitution so the second will not become the legalized version of the first." Thomas Jefferson