Tuesday, May 29, 2012

Letter to Dr John Clements on the vaccine issue.


To
C. John Clements
Centre for International Health
The Macfarlane Burnet Institute for
Medical Research & Public Health Ltd.
GPO Box 2284, Commercial Road
Melbourne, Australia
 
Dt: 20.10.06
 
Dear Sir,
 
Your editorial, "Vaccine preservatives: what is the big deal?" in Indian J Med Res 124, July 2006, reflects the utter callousness and total disregard for the safety of children in Third World countries that the vaccine industry and their lobbyists are guilty of. What makes you think that the children of these countries should be subjected to shots containing mercury when the developed countries are pushing towards mercury free vaccines?
 
In comparing ethylmercury to methylmercury and bringing to fore its easy expulsion, which incidentally remains a debatable issue,  you have committed a grave mistake. Not all children are capable of easy expulsion in the method you describe. There have already been studies that show children with low levels of glutathione have difficulty in expelling mercury of any type. Low weight children, malnourished children, children of parents with autoimmune disorders, children with skin diseases like eczema and psoriasis, children with predisposition to coughs and colds, do have low levels of glutathione.
 
Vaccines are calpable of damage, and not just for the vaccine preservative Thiomersal. By trying to draw attention only to the preservative you have drawn some very wrong conclusions. You have deflected attention from the fact that nutrition, hygiene, sanitation, environmental cleanup, education, poverty eradication is far more important then poisoning children repeatedly over a long period with the toxic dump containing live, attenuated, genetically modified viruses, heavy metals, neurotoxins, carcinogens, immunosuppressants, antibiotics and contaminated animal/human products.
 
By forcing governments of Third World countries to spend scarce resources on the debatable procedure called vaccines you are effectively drawing funds away from the very vital issues enumerated in my previous paragraph.
 
The very fact that today we have over 40,00,000 autistic children today in India, 1 in 200, up from the 1 in 500 reported last year should open the eyes of lobbyists like you. What is causing this sharp increase? What is more favorable, diseases like autism, ADHD, PDD, and other autoimmune disorders like diabetes, Parkinsons, Alzheimers and cancer or entirely treatable and curable acute illnesses that may even be crucial for strengthening immunity as the body adapts itself to the environment?
 
When dealing with pregnant mothers and infants the key word should be EXTREME CAUTION. But the medical community and lobbyists like you are resorting to gay abandon in poisoning the children of the world. Posterity, I am afraid, will judge your ilk very severely.
 
I demand you immediately retract your irresponsible statements and publish an apology. Moreover the health of the population depends as much on the preferences of the subjects than on the whims and fancies of people who have since moved away from the noble ideals they are expected to adhere to.
 
Yours faithfully,
Jagannath Chatterjee
Vaccine Damage Victim,
Health Reform Activist.

Medical Mafia: Interview With Dr Guy Lanctot


 
An Interview With Guylaine Lanctot, M.D. By Kenneth & Dee Burke
Why Are People Still Dying Of Cancer After 50 Years Of Research?

Why Is Only Treatment Remunerated And Not Prevention In Medical Care?

What Part Do The Financiers Play In The Medical Establishment?

Burke: Tell us about yourself?

Guylaine Lanctot: As a medical doctor, I practiced medicine for over
20 years in different countries. I went to different provinces in
Canada, and I lived in the U.S. for 6 years. I got to know the
medical system. I was questioning, "Why is everything so expensive?
Why are we getting sicker and sicker and health care is getting more
and more expensive, and everybody's unhappy?" I realized that
different systems are totally alike. They have different names but,
whether they are a capitalist system, like we have in the U.S., or
socialized, like in France, or in between, like in Canada, the bottom
line is that the medical systems are all alike. They all serve
financiers and not the people. That's the basic thing. The bottom
line is that the medical systems are controlled by financiers in
order to serve financiers. Since you cannot serve people unless they
get sick, the whole medical system is designed to make people sicker
and sicker. When I realized this, I had the choice either to obey the
medical authorities and keep my mouth shut or to obey my conscious
and speak out. I made a decision to obey my conscious, knowing what
the punishments were when one doesn't obey the system. So, I wrote
the book The Medical Mafia: How to Get Out of It Alive and Take Back
Our Health and Wealth. Now, the book is not a denunciation of
medicine even though the title may lead you to think that. It's a
book that explains how the system works. If we don't know how it
works, we can't understand anything. It's so complicated, we think
we're never going to understand it, so, we raise our arms and give
up. The medical system is meant to be complicated. I decided to
identify the real players, and I'll show the public where each player
stands and how the game is played. This is the first part of my book,
explaining how the system works. Next, what are we going to do? I'm a
person who likes to come up with solutions, otherwise there is no
point complaining. We need a solution.

Burke: So, what did you decide?

Guylaine Lanctot: If we are in the system, it's because we agree to
it, consciously, or not. So what did we do to make this happen?
Doctors want to help their patients and the patients want to be
helped. How come it doesn't happen?

Burke: Excellent question!

Guylaine Lanctot: The reason is that, coming between the doctor and
the patient there are intermediate people. There is the government
taking the patient's rights and owning them and putting up the
legislation about how medicine is going to be practiced and what's
right or wrong. Then, there are the insurance companies taking the
patient's money and deciding how this money is going to be returned
to the doctors. So, patients and doctors don't have a relationship
anymore. Patients and doctors have a relationship only through
insurance companies and through the government. Why did we allow this
to happen? That's the question. We allowed it to happen because we
believe in two illusions. The first illusion is what we call
protection. We think we need protection, but you cannot be protected.
You can have all the protection you want. If the ceiling falls on
your head, you die. So, protection does not exist. We don't trust
ourselves; we don't trust the doctors. We think we need protection.
So, we bought the idea that we need protection which can only be
given by the external authorities. So, here they are. We're not good
enough. We need someone to protect us. We gave our rights away to
gain protection. However, external authorities will not protect us.
Our second illusion is security. We need security. Security does not
exist. We bought into this illusion and gave our money away in the
name of security to insurance companies. So, here we are. No more
power. No more control over our money and our rights.

Burke: How can we change this?

Guylaine Lanctot: Now that we know how we made this happen, we can
change it. This is by becoming responsible. How are we going to
change it? We are going to change the system by realizing that we are
the only authority, and this authority is not outside. It is within
us. Inside we are all-powerful. We do not need security; it doesn't
exist. We don't need protection. Security and protection are created
out of fear. And out of fear we remain in slavery. When we move out
of fear, which is an illusion created from a lack of love, and then
we switch to loving ourselves, we are free. Love means freedom. When
I love myself this means I allow myself all the freedoms of thinking,
saying and doing in my life. When I have unconditional love of
myself, of doing whatever I want, thinking whatever I want, then I'm
free. This is what freedom, in my opinion, is all about. So, we can
run our own lives. We can be in charge of our own health. We can stop
believing that we need external authorities, and realize that we are
the authorities. We are all-powerful. We are divine in nature with no
limit. Is God fearful? Does God buy insurance? If he did the
insurance companies would certainly let us know!

Burke: Your concepts are certainly fascinating!

Guylaine Lanctot: Our problem is that we've forgotten who we are, you
see, and we are behaving like sheep out of fear. Our health is
directly related to our energy frequencies. All of what we are
talking about is frequency, and higher consciousness. The more
conscious we are of who we are, which is a part of the Creator, or
god/goddess, the better our health will be!

Burke: So, you're a doctor in the medical profession, and you started
to make objections?

Guylaine Lanctot: I never made objections. Very few. In my field, my
colleagues wanted me to get into technology, and I said no. I always
practiced personal medicine. I worked in the field of phlebology,
which is the treatment of varicose veins. I developed a whole program
and I was internationally renowned for what I did, and I always
worked with my hands. My colleagues started telling me that a machine
would do a better diagnosis for me. I said no. I refused this
machine, which was very expensive. If you buy a machine for $100,000,
someone has to pay for that. So, the patient has to pay for something
I don't need, to help him or her. This is when I started speaking
out. It lasted over a period of ten years as I grew to understand
what was going on and how the medical system worked. At the same time
I was in an exploration for myself also.

Burke: Were you exploring spirituality at this time?

Guylaine Lanctot: I started realizing that there was something more
than the physical body. I realized that emotions had something to do
with disease. Then, I heard about psychosomatic medicine. I said, "I
want to know more about this." So, I started going outside of
mainstream medicine and looking for what was available. That was the
early '80's. Some of my friends would talk to me about energy, and
chakras and prana, and karma. I said, "What the heck is that?" I had
no idea what they meant, but I had an open mind. So, I will make my
own judgment and discernment about these things. I went all over the
world, as far as Siberia, meeting people who did things in the field
of alternative medicine. I realized that they were not quacks. I
could go anywhere and nothing was hidden from me. Patients were not
considered quacks either. It worked very well. I saw better results
than what we got in normal medicine, and it was cheaper. I had never
heard about these things as a physician. I was told that everything
outside of medicine was all quackery. These types of alternative
treatments were denied by medicine, and these innovative health
professionals were harassed and persecuted, while doing something
that helped to bring treatment costs down. There was something
definitely wrong here. Something didn't make sense for me. So, my
search was an eye-widening experience!

Burke: Your exploration lasted for ten years?

Guylaine Lanctot: Yes. During this time I realized what the system
was and how it worked. But, my question was, "What are we going to
do?" In my book, I've described the levels of medicine. There is
conventional medicine, which treats the visible physical body only.
Then, you have alternative medicine, which treats the invisible body,
the emotional and mental bodies. In my experience, conventional
medicine is destructive. Alternative medicine will improve your
health but will not solve the problem. Self-healing, which is healing
at the level of the soul, is where the healing takes place, because
disease starts here.

Burke: Can you speak more about the soul in relation to healing?

Guylaine Lanctot: Well, how does the soul get sick? What's the
disease of the soul? I believe it is due to submission, expecting
love to come from outside, from external authorities. We're giving
others the power to make us happy. Hypothetically, if my mom doesn't
like me, I'm sad and I get sick. Whereas, if I realize that I am the
only authority, that love is within me, that I am pure, divine,
unlimited love, then I don't need other people's approval to do what
I want to do in my life. I'll just listen to my inner voice, and do
what my inner voice tells me to do. This is what I call in the
book "sovereignty." So, the illness of the soul is submission, and
the wellness or healing of the soul is sovereignty, individual
sovereignty. Now, we've always been led to believe that sovereignty
exists for a country or for a kind or queen.

Burke: Yes.

Guylaine Lanctot: Well, it's a major leap in consciousness to realize
that there's no such thing. For instance, if you think about a
country, a country is limited. A kind or queen is limited. Whereas
sovereignty has no limit. Therefore, a country cannot be sovereign.
Only a Divine entity, only God, the Creator, is sovereign; and only
God within us, our inner god/goddess, can be sovereign. So, we are
the Creator living in our bodies; so we are divine. Since we are
immortal and divine individuals we do not need to die. Why do we die?
We believe death is going to happen so we make it happen. If we make
death happen we can make immortality happen. If we make suffering
happen we can make joy happen for us and the society we are living
in. We are creators by nature. We can create everything we want. We
can create a terrible future or a fantastic one. We've got the
option. Why were we never told that? For centuries all of the
authorities, especially the religious ones, have taught us that God
is outside. God makes the rules and God, although he is pure love,
will punish us if we don't do this or that. Is this possible? I
believe it is impossible! When people realize they are god/goddess,
that God lives within them, you cannot dominate or exploit them
anymore! People can only be kept in slavery if you make them believe
they are sheep and need someone to obey other than themselves. The
moment people realize they are their only authority and obey their
conscious, the outside authorities no longer have control over them!

Burke: Tell us more of your personal story dealing with the
authorities, if you will.

Guylaine Lanctot: Okay. I had the choice to either obey the external
authorities and keep my mouth shut or obey my inner authority, which
is my conscious, and speak out, which I did. So, I launched the book;
then, the external authorities asked me to resign.

Burke: Based on what reason?

Guylaine Lanctot: The authorities make laws the way they want to. We
have to realize that all legality is man-made law.

Burke: But you didn't do anything that was breaking the law.

Guylaine Lanctot: Well, yes. Their law says that a doctor speaking in
public can only say what mainstream medicine recognizes.

Burke: We didn't know that.

Guylaine Lanctot: You don't hear this. People don't know this medical
establishment rule. Doctors are not allowed to give alternative
information to their patients.

Burke: In what countries?

Guylaine Lanctot: It's the same all over. It's a way to keep doctors
in line.

Burke: There are doctors who practice alternative health in the U.S.
and who also talk about these things. We've personally heard them.

Guylaine Lanctot: And they have many problems, including being
harassed and persecuted. A doctor came to me right after a conference
I gave. He said, "I've been persecuted. I had my license suspended
and I'm under surveillance for five years."

Burke: So, at a whim, the medical boards can remove your license?

Guylaine Lanctot: They make the laws they want. They do their tricks.

Burke: Tell us what happened to you?

Guylaine Lanctot: The medical board asked me to resign and I said no.
I said, "I'm not going to resign because you pretend that you protect
the public, and I don't see how I am going against your rules by
giving the public true information. I am protecting the public also,
by informing them. Why would I resign?" I told them that if they
would say publicly that they protect financiers' interests that I
would resign immediately! I told them that I didn't want to be part
of their organization anyhow. So, of course, they never would do what
I asked them to do. They only said, "If you don't resign, we will
take your license away. We will have you in a trial before the
disciplinary committee and we will revoke your license." I
said, "Fine," so I went to court. What I did is different than what
doctors usually do, which is defend themselves. I didn't defend
myself. You see, defense is attempting to prove to the other side
that you're right. The medical board couldn't care less if I was
right. They wanted my license. They wanted me to resign!

Burke: So, what happened?

Guylaine Lanctot: I didn't try to prove anything to them. I only went
into court and used it as a platform. I didn't have a lawyer, so I
could do anything I wanted to.

Burke: Was this in a regular courtroom, a private hearing, or what?

Guylaine Lanctot: No. It was a court, open to the public. It was a
court in a medical building. There were three judges---a lawyer as a
judge, plus to doctors; then there was the lawyer of the medical
board, the doctors suing me, and finally me. It was the biggest joke.
It lasted fifteen days over a year. I think they'll never forget it.

Burke: So the public knows about it. What kinds of things happened?

Guylaine Lanctot: Well, again, let's not forget that the media mostly
belongs to the financiers. So, the media covered the establishment
point of view. They went with them. It didn't matter. It made so much
noise that the public, the people, became aware that there was
something wrong somewhere. I had a great reputation and was very well
known all over Canada during this time. People knew me. They
asked, "What's going on? Why are they after here?" My story made so
much noise on the television and in the newspapers that, in the
province of Quebec, people stopped me on the street and said, "Don't
give up! We're behind you! Don't give up! We're with you!" Even
though the media did not serve me but served the establishment, the
people still got my message.

Burke: Can you give us examples of some kinds of things that you had
to talk about in court? You said you were not defending yourself.

Guylaine Lanctot: Well, it proceeded like a normal trial. They would
bring their expert witnesses first. The prosecutor brings his expert
witnesses in, who are all paid to say that you are dumb, stupid, and
that what you say is wrong and that you shouldn't do this or that.
And, the newspapers would report heavily on the prosecutor's
position. They were so nervous and so angry. One doctor, as an expert
witness, said that he had been waiting for one year and kept his
mouth shut, and he was so angry with me about my book that he was
banging on the table once he could speak in court! He was angry about
my book selling like mad and everybody knowing about it. I had come
up with an explanation about vaccines in my book. The medical
establishment position is that you don't explain or touch vaccines.

Burke: Can you share your thought about this?

Guylaine Lanctot: Okay. I'll talk about vaccines. Number one,
vaccines make people sick. They don't work. They don't protect. The
use of vaccines is totally wrong! It's perfect nonsense based on
fear. It's fear of the disease. So, in order for you not to get the
disease I, as your doctor, am going to give the disease to you right
away, but not as strong. This way your body will know about the
disease and, if you ever get it in the future, you won't be as sick
the second time.

Burke: Can you expound on this more?

Guylaine Lanctot: What they say is total nonsense. If I came to you
and said, "I'm going to perform a little sexual assault on you---a
small rape---because, one day you could meet a rapist and you could
be raped. But, it won't be as bad the second time as the first time."
This is exactly the same thing as giving someone a vaccine, or a
little bit of disease. It's nonsense! Immunization is total nonsense!
More than that is what's hidden from people about vaccines. They are
dangerous. One child out of five has overwhelming disabilities from
vaccines---neurological problems, seizures. I've got a whole list.
There are plenty of books on this subject. Doctors don't even read
about this.

Burke: Most doctors probably believe what they're taught in medical
school.

Guylaine Lanctot: They obey. We all obey blindly. That's the thing.
So, more than that, vaccines are used to test biological weapons. (In
my research) I found that vaccines are used to spread diseases. They
are used for targeted genocides.

Burke: To say that this kind of information that you are sharing is
amazing barely does it justice.

Guylaine Lanctot: So, you don't touch vaccines. When I learned about
vaccines I said, "Never again!" Lots of doctors have spoken out,
denouncing medicine in certain aspects, but they never touch
vaccines!

Burke: We have read that vaccinations can be used to put microchips
into people to control them. Do you know about that?

Guylaine Lanctot: I know about that but since I don't have proof I
didn't put into the book.

Burke: We have a friend who had vaccines, and she got a large
malignant tumor in her brain that she thought may have come from the
polio vaccine.

Guylaine Lanctot: VS-40 is the polio vaccine. Since 1960 the
authorities have known that the polio vaccine is contaminated with VS-
40, and that it does cause brain tumors. VS-40 comes from an African
monkey. How can you get it in your brain? The culture of polio
vaccine is made on monkey kidneys. And those monkeys are contaminated
with VS-40; so the vaccines are contaminated with VS-40. The
authorities know this.

Burke: Maybe the authorities don't know the monkeys are contaminated?

Guylaine Lanctot: Yes. They know. They've had the proof since 1960.
There's a fantastic book that came on the market in 1988 or 1989
written by Edward Shorter. It's called The Health Century. They
printed 35,000 of those books. In the book the author had interviews
with the people who did this (vaccine) work and who proved it. After
it was on the market one month all of a sudden there were no more
books. I've got the book.

Burke: Are you saying that some or all of the monkeys are
contaminated?

Guylaine Lanctot: They are all contaminated. It's been proved. I've
got cultures made of those kidneys. Cultures from those monkeys on
which polio vaccines are cultivated are contaminated. The scientists
were told by the researchers not to use those contaminated monkey
kidneys, but they did it anyhow, in 1960.

Burke: So, suppose we've had these vaccines. What is the solution to
this?

Guylaine Lanctot: Don't be afraid. Should it be vaccines; should it
be parasites; should it be anything. Realize that whatever you do, we
can fight the virus or we can fight the parasites or we can fight
anything else, but it's still war. What I propose is self-healing.
Instead of war on whatever exists, let's make peace with it,
realizing that we made it happen. We are responsible. We are also
god/goddess. Nobody else can make this happen to us. This is what
individual sovereignty, in my opinion, is all about. This is the key.
We created this out of love for ourselves, so it can only be good.
Then, we bless the disease. We stop fighting it. We bless ourselves.
Remember, if we created it, we can heal it.

Burke: Can you share more examples of your research about the medical
profession that you offer in your book?

Guylaine Lanctot: Yes. I'm certain that your readers know about the
work of (scientist) Royal Rife and his electro-magnetic wave length
therapy that cured cancer and other things. Many doctors were using
this method successfully in the 1930's. However, the director of the
AMA, Morris Fishbein, wanted to be "cut in" on the potential profits
from this new "cure." But, this was refused him. Due to his influence
doctors were then forced to stop these treatments. The AMA, under
Fishbein, forbade articles to be published in medical journals about
this; laboratory results done by the government were suddenly
mysteriously lost. Researchers were treated as liars who proposed
these techniques, and the writer of an article that was published by
the Smithsonian Institute explaining Rife's techniques died in a car
accident. Who was responsible for suppressing Rife's technology? Even
in the 1930's the financiers were already mostly controlling
medicine. The AMA issued its approval of medications and products for
a fee (during this time). Thomas Rivers, who was the director of the
Rockefeller Hospital from 1937 to 1955 and a Vice President of the
Rockefeller Institute from 1953 until his death, influenced cancer
research in a major way. John D. Rockefeller had already donated
$65,000 to the Rockefeller Institute for medical research. Also, the
first cancer hospital in the U.S. was the Sloan-Kettering Memorial
Cancer Center and this was the test center for the large drug
companies between 1940 and 1955. Cornelius Rhodes was affiliated with
both the Rockefeller Institute and Sloan-Kettering and he was the
biggest proponent of chemotherapy in the nation. Fishbein, Rivers an
Rhodes obviously wielded tremendous power through their alignments
with financial interests. A French biologist, Gaston Naessens,
developed a line of successful anti-cancer products, but due to legal
entanglements had to stop treating his patients in France. He went to
Canada in 1964, developed more cancer remedies, again went to court,
but he was successful this time as patients appeared from all over
the world to support the success of his treatments. The world
financiers have no allegiance to any country and band together to
exploit us all. Also, what is called "social marketing" or "social
engineering" is a science that gets people to buy ideas that make no
sense, whose goal is the submission of conscious, to put
consciousness to sleep in order to influence. Medical social
marketing is designed to sell sickness to people instead of health!
Did you know that in the U.S. alone $30 billion is spent annually on
prescribed drugs and $50 billion in over-the-counter drugs. Makes you
wonder, doesn't it?

Burke: Can you tell us about your work in Canada?

Guylaine Lanctot: I travel all over the world and give conferences
and three-hour workshops so people can realize that when we change
ourselves we change the world. This leads to world peace, and this
leads to Heaven on Earth.

Burke: Your workshop basically explaining to people how to do things
for themselves?

Guylaine Lanctot: I show people there is another way. Before, we had
a choice between a black sheep or a red sheep. Either we're in the
system or we're disobeying the system, but we're still recognizing
the system. What I show is that there is another option. I give a
conference and then a three-hour workshop. For people who like the
workshop there is a one-week integration program. It's called "My
Sovereignty: Becoming an Individual Sovereign." How to integrate it.
I do it only in Quebec because, if I go and do it elsewhere, people
will wait for me to come. I say, "No. You come. You learn it, and
then you give it in your own area."

Burke: So, you give this instruction in Canada only?

Guylaine Lanctot: For one week. The rest I do all over the world.

Burke: Your thoughts about going within ourselves to help change the
world seems to be a theme we hear a lot lately. The time must be here
for this to happen in a major way.

Guylaine Lanctot: When you say that God is outside, you keep giving
your power to external authorities. Being God within our bodies is
who we really are. It's important for us to realize this. We are
divine in nature.

Burke: You are such an incredible role model for what you teach. Your
face glows. You have such a peace about you and such a joy. It shows.

Guylaine Lanctot: It's because I went through my experience. I'm
learning but every time I understand something I apply it. I always
try it before I talk about it so that I know what it is like. It's
just making a choice.

Burke: Can you briefly complete your personal court story?

Guylaine Lanctot: The court story went on until September, 1996. It
lasted over a year. The last part was my testimony. Again, the
authorities attempted to stop me. They stopped my testimony, so I
said, "Okay. That's over. My job is done." My job was to put light on
that institution. I said, "It's over. Here's my resignation." I had
two pieces of paper. One was the resignation, and the other one was
my declaration. So, I resigned as a submitted physician and I
declared myself as a free physician.

Burke: You gave them both papers?

Guylaine Lanctot: Both papers. Then I left.

Burke: You did this in court?

Guylaine Lanctot: Yes. They said, "You can't do that." I said, "Yes, I
can. I can do whatever I want."

Burke: Bravo!

Guylaine Lanctot: Life is fun. We only forget that life is a comedy.
It's not a tragedy. If we have a tragedy and we suffer, just laugh at
it.

Burke: The Creator intends for us to be happy.

Guylaine Lanctot: Yes, and to remember that WE are the Creator.
That's sometimes hard to say. I believe that we are the Creator here
on Earth and we decided (as spirits) to come and play the (Earth)
game.

Burke: We once heard a story that if the Creator were looking for a
hiding place it would be simple to hide in the heart of mankind! No
one would look there!

Guylaine Lanctot: Yes. The table in front of us is divine. The only
difference between the table and you is that the table does not know
that it is divine. But you have the choice as a human being. This is
where we stand---to behave like an animal or to behave like a
god/goddess. This is the freedom of choice. We have to make a
decision. Right now, we have been behaving like sheep....but we can
stay there, or we can move on!

How Vaccines Compromise the Immune System


The Epoch Times

How Vaccines Compromise the Immune System

Louise Valentine
Epoch Times New York Staff
Feb 11, 2006

DO NO HARM? Questions persist regarding vaccine efficacy and safety. (David McNew/Getty Images)
http://www.theepochtimes.com/tools/printer.asp?id=38052
The presupposition is that vaccines are protecting us from deadly diseases. A common observation is the occurrence of a flu-like illness in those who have received the flu vaccine. According to the CDC (Centers for Disease Control) the efficacy of the flu vaccine in the elderly is 30 to 40 percent. In many cases, the subject does not need immunizing, such as newborns from healthy mothers who receive the hepatitis B vaccine. Mumps, rubella and chickenpox tend not to be deadly diseases. People whose children have become autistic, hyperactive, allergic or autoimmune have blamed the vaccines. How can vaccines cause diseases when they are supposed to protect us from them?
 
Our immune systems most effectively attack invading organisms that are inhaled, ingested or touched. The first line of defense against viruses and bacteria is immunoglobulin A (IgA), which is found in the mucosal linings of our noses and intestines and in our saliva. A deficiency of IgA causes allergies and frequent colds.
 
Injecting a disease bypasses this first line of defense. When bypassed the IgA transmutes to immunoglobulin E (IgE), the harbinger for recurrent infections. As the B cells, that make antibodies to antigens, increase, activated by the antigens in the vaccine, the T cells, which are responsible for cell-based immunity and cell memory, decrease. Cell memory makes those of us who have actually experienced the disease completely immune thereafter, whereas those who get vaccines sometimes get what they were vaccinated for: whooping cough, measles or chickenpox. Since 1979, with the rare exception of someone coming into this country with polio, the live oral polio vaccine has caused all other cases of polio in the U.S.
 
The virus in any vaccine is cultured on tissue from monkeys, chicks or aborted fetuses, which have produced antigens that cannot be filtered out. These antigens can affect the human body. For example, the antibody to the myelin (the protective sheath around nerves) protein from chick cell culture can cross react with human tissue, causing myelin destruction of the vaccine receiver, which can cause ADHD (attention deficit hyperactivity disorder), mental retardation, Lou Gehrig's disease, multiple sclerosis, seizures and other autoimmune disorders.
 
Another cause of these autoimmune conditions is molecular mimicry. The measles virus has proteins very similar to those in myelin, so the antibodies setting out to destroy the virus end up destroying the myelin of those vaccinated, causing postvaccinal encephalomyelitis, which has been renamed autism.
 
The hyperactivity of the B cells make autoantibodies that attack different tissues, causing allergies, Crohn's disease, colitis, juvenile diabetes and other autoimmune problems, depending on the targeted tissue. Most of these problems appear in children who undergo heavy vaccination programs. Many of our veterans, also heavily vaccinated, have neurological problems.
 
The ingredients of vaccines do not include eye of newt, which would at least contain vitamin A, but they do contain an impressive array of toxic substances in addition to the actual viruses. There are antibiotics that can cause reactions in those who are allergic; aluminum that has been implicated in the promotion of Alzheimer's disease; MSG and egg proteins, both of which are allergens for some people; thimerosal, a neurotoxin; formaldehyde, a carcinogen and aborted fetal tissue, which compromises the beliefs of those against abortion.
 
This article barely scratches the surface of the true nature of vaccines. We take them and give them to our kids out of fear and because schools and programs have excluded those who refuse vaccinations. One out of six children is labeled learning disabled, one out of 166 children is autistic, most of whom are boys. The numbers have risen in proportion to the number of vaccines given.

Growing Evidence: MMR May Cause Autism, IBD.


Former science chief: 'MMR fears coming true'

By SUE CORRIGAN, Mail on Sunday
Last updated at 16:08 22 March 2006

MMR jab
The Government is also considering flu jabs for under-twos - not to protect the children, but adults they may infect
A former Government medical officer responsible for deciding whether medicines are safe has accused the Government of "utterly inexplicable complacency" over the MMR triple vaccine for children.
Dr Peter Fletcher, who was Chief Scientific Officer at the Department of Health, said if it is proven that the jab causes autism, "the refusal by governments to evaluate the risks properly will make this one of the greatest scandals in medical history".
He added that after agreeing to be an expert witness on drug-safety trials for parents' lawyers, he had received and studied thousands of documents relating to the case which he believed the public had a right to see.
He said he has seen a "steady accumulation of evidence" from scientists worldwide that the measles, mumps and rubella jab is causing brain damage in certain children.
But he added: "There are very powerful people in positions of great authority in Britain and elsewhere who have staked their reputations and careers on the safety of MMR and they are willing to do almost anything to protect themselves."
His warning follows reports that the Government is this week planning to announce the addition of a jab against pneumococcal meningitis for babies, probably from next April. It is also considering flu jabs for under-twos - not to protect the children, but adults they may infect.
In the late Seventies, Dr Fletcher served as Chief Scientific Officer at the DoH and Medical Assessor to the Committee on Safety of Medicines, meaning he was responsible for deciding if new vaccines were safe.
He first expressed concerns about MMR in 2001, saying safety trials before the vaccine's introduction in Britain were inadequate.
Now he says the theoretical fears he raised appear to be becoming reality.
He said the rising tide of autism cases and growing scientific understanding of autism-related bowel disease have convinced him the MMR vaccine may be to blame.
"Clinical and scientific data is steadily accumulating that the live measles virus in MMR can cause brain, gut and immune system damage in a subset of vulnerable children," he said. "There's no one conclusive piece of scientific evidence, no 'smoking gun', because there very rarely is when adverse drug reactions are first suspected. When vaccine damage in very young children is involved, it is harder to prove the links.
"But it is the steady accumulation of evidence, from a number of respected universities, teaching hospitals and laboratories around the world, that matters here. There's far too much to ignore. Yet government health authorities are, it seems, more than happy to do so."
'Why isn't the Government taking this massive public health problem more seriously?'
Dr Fletcher said he found "this official complacency utterly inexplicable" in the light of an explosive worldwide increase in regressive autism and inflammatory bowel disease in children, which was first linked to the live measles virus in the MMR jab by clinical researcher Dr Andrew Wakefield in 1998.
"When scientists first raised fears of a possible link between mad cow disease and an apparently new, variant form of CJD they had detected in just 20 or 30 patients, everybody panicked and millions of cows were slaughtered," said Dr Fletcher.
"Yet there has been a tenfold increase in autism and related forms of brain damage over the past 15 years, roughly coinciding with MMR's introduction, and an extremely worrying increase in childhood inflammatory bowel diseases and immune disorders such as diabetes, and no one in authority will even admit it's happening, let alone try to investigate the causes."
He said there was "no way" the tenfold leap in autistic children could be the result of better recognition and definitional changes, as claimed by health authorities.
"It is highly likely that at least part of this increase is a vaccinerelated problem." he said. "But whatever it is, why isn't the Government taking this massive public health problem more seriously?"
His outspokenness will infuriate health authorities, who have spent millions of pounds shoring up confidence in MMR since Dr Wakefield's 1998 statement.
But Dr Fletcher said the Government is undermining public confidence in vaccine safety by refusing to do in-depth clinical research to rule out fears of MMR damage to children.
He added that the risks of brain and gut damage from MMR injections seem to be much higher in children where a brother or sister has diabetes, an immune disorder.
"That is a very strong clinical signal that some children are immunologically at risk from MMR," he said. "Why is the Government not investigating it further - diverting some of the millions of pounds spent on advertising and PR campaigns to promote MMR uptake into detailed clinical research instead?"
Now retired after a distinguished 40-year career in science and medicine in Britain, Europe and the US, Dr Fletcher said that without such research, health authorities could not possibly rule out fears about MMR.
He said: "It is entirely possible that the immune systems of a small minority simply cannot cope with the challenge of the three live viruses in the MMR jab, and the ever-increasing vaccine load in general."
He said he had decided to speak out because of his deep concern at the lack of treatment for autistic children with bowel disease, as revealed in The Mail on Sunday two weeks ago.
He called the sudden termination of legal aid to parents of allegedly vaccine-damaged children in late 2003 "a monstrous injustice". After agreeing to be a witness for the parents, he received thousands of documents relating to the case.
"Now, it seems, unless the parents force the Government to restore legal aid, much of this revealing evidence may never come out," he said.
The Department of Health said: "MMR remains the best protection against measles, mumps and rubella. It is recognised by the World Health Organisation as having an outstanding safety record and there is a wealth of evidence showing children who receive the MMR vaccine are no more at risk of autism than those who don't."


Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-376203/Former-science-chief-MMR-fears-coming-true.html#ixzz1wG3ZyDR9

Monday, May 28, 2012

Autism: Why Boys Suffer More.

Primary reasons why Girls are 4 times less prone to Autism than Boys: - Joel Lord, Vaccine Resistance Movement.

1. The female sex hormone, Estrogen, acts as a defense mechanism in the female body, 'protecting the brain from being damaged by low Vitamin D, probably by increasing the amount of activated Vitamin D present'. Estrogen is also believed to decrease Thimerosal’s toxic affects; versus Testosterone, the male sex hormone, which greatly increases the toxicity. Initial symptoms of Early Onset Autism typically appear at 12-15 months old, precisely when the MMR vaccine is administered.

“Experiments using this system have also demonstrated, in agreement with published literature, that many antibiotics, other heavy metals and chemicals increase the toxicity of mercury and thimerosal (ethyl mercury). Additionally, in this same system the female hormone estrogen decreases thimerosal’s toxic effects. In contrast, the male hormone testosterone greatly increases the toxicity. This may explain the 4 to 1 ratio of boys to girls that become autistic and the observation that boys represent the vast majority of the severe cases of autism.” Boyd Haley, Ph.D. (Testimony Before the House Government Reform Committee)

“One of the conundrums of autism is why there is an approximate ratio of four boys to every girl who gets this disease. Dr. Lovell therefore tested the possibility that this could be hormone related. The latest results were quite marked in their effects. Neurons that were pre-incubated with estrogen demonstrated substantial protection against thimerosal-induced neuron death. In contrast, the addition of testosterone caused a very large increase in thimerosal-induced neuron death. A low nanomolar level of thimerosal that gave less than 5 percent neuron death in three hours could be increased to 100 percent cell death by the addition of one micromolar level of testosterone. Testosterone alone at this level also showed less than 5 percent cell death. The opposing effects of estrogen and testosterone may explain the gender-based four-to-one ratio.” Dr. Boyd E. Haley

2. ‘Every DNA molecules is composed of two strands. When a cell detects a DNA duplex with a difference between its two DNA strands, that duplex is “repaired” by the rather Draconian expedient of chopping out the entire region, on both strands of the DNA molecule. No effort is made by the cell to determine which strand is correct — both are discarded. The gap that this creates is filled by copying off the sequence present at that region on the other chromosome. All this editing happens when the two versions of the chromosome are paired closely together in the early stages of gamete (egg and sperm) formation, the process we biologists call meiosis.

All females have two copies of the “so-called” X chromosome. The X chromosome is about the same size as other 22 human chromosomes, which also occur in pairs, and like them is packed with some 1000 genes. The reason there are two copies of the X and other chromosome is to allow for the repair of the inevitable damage that occurs over time to individual genes because of wear-and-tear, chemical damage, and mistakes in copying. Because this sort of damage is passed on to offspring, it tends to accumulate over time. For this reason, genes must be edited every so often to repair the accumulated mutations (biologists call damage to genes mutation).

Males, by contrast to females, have only one copy of this X chromosome, not two. The other chromosome of the pair in males is called the Y chromosome and is much smaller than the X. Biologists thought until very recently that the Y chromosome had only a few active genes. Because there is no other Y to serve as a pairing partner in meiosis, most of its genes had been thought to have decayed, the victims of Muller’s ratchet, leaving the Y chromosome a genetic wasteland with only a very few active genes surviving on it.’ Dr. George Johnson

3. Girls are developmentally ahead of boys early in life (undoubtedly a species survival mechanism). The female Myelin Shealth, Meninges & Blood-Brain barrier may also be stronger, better equipped to withstand a premature breach of the electrical grid system - designed to protect the brain & central nervous system from vaccine derived heavy metal/virus/bacterium/excipient "sludge' toxicity. The 'connective tissue that allows communication between the two hemispheres of the brain tends to be thicker.'

'Females have more complex brain structure. Researcher Eilin Ludes from the Frankfurt University studied brain pictures of 30 people of both sexes and arrived at a conclusion that female brain structure implies better thinking abilities and connection between neurons. According to the researcher, female brain contains 20 per cent more grey matter as compared with that of male's, its neurons are closer to each other. Eilin Ludes explains the phenomenon with the fact that female brain is confined within a smaller cranium than men's, that is why the structure of female brain is more complicated thanks to better internal development.'

Saturday, May 26, 2012

Powerful People & Population Control



Those Involved in Population Control
Brent Jessop
Knowledge Driven Revolution.com
Tuesday, January 1, 2008
"In the eight years that I have been a part-time propagandist, I have found that many people in influential positions share my concern. I have had encouraging letters from all over the world. People in radio and television have been extremely helpful in providing exposure for the issues." - Paul Ehrlich, 1968 (p159)
Paul Ehrlich's book The Population Bomb* describes a variety of different ways to reduce the population of the world. This includes, among other things; financial incentivesmanipulative sex educationforced vasectomies for every man with more than three children, and adding sterilants to the water supply or food staples.

But Ehrlich is only one man, albeit a well connected Stanford University professor, but still just an individual. Who else is involved in these types of population control schemes?

United States Government
"In late 1970. Congress finally placed the Family Planning Services and Population Research Act to provide free contraception to the poor through non-profit agencies. It also established an Office of Population Affairs in the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare to sponsor further research on birth control." - 85

"Beginning with Senators Ernest Gruening and Joseph Clark in the middle 1960s, there has been a small group of dedicated people in Congress who have been trying to get the government to move on these matters. More recently, the ball has been carried by Senators Joseph Tydings and Robert Packwood, and Representatives Paul McCloskey,George Bush, and James Scheuer." [emphasis mine] - 86

"Despite repeated statements of concern since 1965 by President's Johnson and Nixon..." - 85

United Nations and Co.
"The United Nations has greatly increased its family planning activities, operation through several agencies including WHO [World Health Organization], UNICEF, and UNESCO [United Nations Education, Scientific, and Cultural Organization]. Secretary Generat U Thant has been urged by a study group to establish a special "world population institute" promptly to take practical action against population growth. Robert McNamara, president of the World Bank, has put population projects high on the Bank's list of priorities. The Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) is also getting into the field." - 84
Foundations
"In March 1970, a two-year Commission on Population Growth and the American Future was established under the chairmanship of John D. Rockefeller, III."

"Aside from government contributions, private foundations such as Ford and Rockefeller are becoming more involved in programs, both for research and overseas family planning projects." - 86
Zero Population Growth
"But a new organization exists - Zero Population Growth - whose mission is to educate the public and politicians to the necessity for stopping population growth as soon as possible, to lobby for legislation, and to work for politicians who support the same goals. ZPG now has more than 30,000 members and is growing fast. Hopefully it will have developed some real political clout by 1972." - 88
Ehrlich forgets to mention in his book that he founded Zero Population Growth with Richard Bowers and Charles Remington. This organization is still going strong under a new name:Population Connection.

Scientists

Ehrlich, a self proclaimed propagandist, also believes that his fellow scientists, namely biologists, should be much more involved in the "education" of the masses.
"Biologists must promote understanding of the facts of reproductive biology which relate to matters of abortion and contraception. They must do more than simply reiterate the facts of population dynamics. They must point out the biological absurdity of equating a zygote (the cell created by joining of sperm and egg) or fetus (unborn child) with a human being... People are people because of the interaction of genetic information (stored in a chemical language) with an environment. Clearly, the most "humanizing" element of that environment is the cultural element to which the child is not exposed until after birth... in many cases abortion is more desirable than childbirth." - 138
Environmental Groups

The interconnectedness of the environmental movement and the population control fanatics is undeniable and I will examine some of the similarities between The Population Bomb and Al Gore'sAn Inconvenient Truth in the next article of this series. But for now, some of the more obvious environmental connections.

The forward to the The Population Bomb was written by David Brower, the founder of Sierra Club Foundation, the John Muir Institute for Environmental Studies, Friends of the Earth, the League of Conservation Voters, Earth Island Institute (1982), North Cascades Conservation Council, and Fate of the Earth Conferences.

Also The Population Bomb was published by Sierra Club Books.

Ehrlich has also been well rewarded by both the scientific and the environmental community. From his University of Stanford profile:
Professor Ehrlich is a fellow of the American Association for the Advancement of Science, the American Academy of Arts and Sciences, and the American Philosophical Society, and a member of the National Academy of Sciences. Professor Ehrlich has received several honorary degrees, the John Muir Award of the Sierra Club, the Gold Medal Award of the World Wildlife Fund International, a MacArthur Prize Fellowship, the Crafoord Prize of the Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences (given in lieu of a Nobel Prize in areas where the Nobel is not given), in 1993 the Volvo Environmental Prize, in 1994 the United Nations' Sasakawa Environment Prize, in 1995 the Heinz Award for the Environment, in 1998 the Tyler Prize for Environmental Achievement and the Dr. A. H. Heineken Prize for Environmental Sciences, in 1999 the Blue Planet Prize, in 2001 the Eminent Ecologist Award of the Ecological Society of America and the Distinguished Scientist Award of the American Institute of Biological Sciences.
*Quotes from: Paul R. Ehrlich. The Population Bomb: Revised & Expanded Edition (1968, 1971). SBN 345-24489-3-150.