Saturday, June 23, 2018

Vaccination: A Mother's Journey


This is my journey….
I can’t say I believed in vaccination. I knew nothing about it, but had it done anyway. It’s what you do, right? You do what doctors and baby health clinics tell you and what your parents and the media advise you to do. Well I did it, without so much as a question or thought into it. Within moments of my son receiving his immunisations he was screaming. This continued for most of the day and when he wasn’t screaming he was crying. This was unusual as he was a very happy, placid baby, who was already rolling over at 8 weeks and gooing and gahing at the first sight of his mother. The doctor told me his reactions were ’normal’ and he’d be OK in a couple of days.
After the first day he had almost recovered with only some irritability and restlessness noticeable. As the weeks passed he continued to reach milestones and all appeared Ok.
At 4 months of age I dutifully took him for his next round of vaccinations. This time he screamed louder and I could not console him at all. I would breastfeed him, only to have him projectile vomit it back up and still the screaming continued. He had never before vomited at all, ever. After he had vomited 2 feeds I called the doctor and told her what was happening and she said to stop breastfeeding and give him juice only. He kept some of it down but still vomited often.
The next day I called the doctor and told her I think the vaccines have done this and she told me ’ no, it’s just a coincidence’ but to bring him back in, which I did. She referred me to a specialist. While waiting for the specialist appointment in a few days, my baby boy started doing strange things. He started arching his back and crying out in pain. He was as stiff as a board. His eyes would roll into the back of his head. He didn’t have a temperature. He had also started shuddering but he wasn’t cold. (I later learnt from the doctor these were convulsions and seizures). The vomiting continued and I was convinced to give up breastfeeding by the clinic sister. He vomited up the formula also. I was getting very scared.
We went to the specialist appointment and he took some blood for tests and then we had to wait. His symptoms continued and after several days word came from the specialist that the tests showed he was allergic to wheat. I stopped giving him the cereal I had started him on weeks before, but none of the symptoms went away. (when I thought about it later, it was actually rice cereal anyway)
I decided to move to a large city to get more help. Once I saw a doctor there he was immediately admitted to hospital for a battery of test – many of which were conducted under anaesthetic, which of course required my signature to say I have been notified that my baby could die while under. I had not been advised of this, but I signed it not knowing all the medical jargon as I needed to get my baby well again and trusted they knew what they were doing.
By this time my dear little son had lost a lot of weight and nothing I was doing (under advice from doctors and baby health clinics) was working.
After months of tests in the hospital (he stayed there) we were summoned in to an office to be told that they ’didn’t know why my baby was deteriorating, but they estimate he will pass away within a couple of months’.
Soon after I took my baby home to die.
It was an interesting time. You don’t notice things have changed that much when you are with someone everyday. I would go shopping and people would not look at my baby, but rather look the other way. I remember going into the butcher and ordering what I wanted. The butcher refused to take my money as his eyes were transfixed on my son. I didn’t understand any of this. Just people behaving strangely I thought. I didn’t realise how sick he looked – much like the starving babies on T.V. we are now used to seeing in African countries.
My dear little boy was no longer rolling over, gooing or gahing, in fact he wasn’t doing anything anymore. He was now over one year of age and had not progressed past 4 months of age, when he had his last immunisations. He had in fact regressed to a newborn state, although now he was the length of a toddler. I carried him around in a sling close to my heart and waited for the day he would leave me forever.
When blood started coming from his mouth and I was not getting much sleep at all so I could watch over him, he was admitted to hospital again. He passed away a few weeks later. Vaccination killed him, I have no doubt. If he crawled under the sink and drank the same poisonous concoction of heavy metals, formaldehyde, foreign proteins, multiple viruses and a host of other toxins, the emergency room would have called it poisoning. Because it was injected into his body, it’s called ’a coincidence’! Funny about that, and I have since met many parents with similar stories.
A few years passed and I went on to have another child. This time
I was not going to be complacent. I had over the years researched the vaccination issue at length. I read the product inserts and found the reactions all printed there so my suspicions were confirmed by the drug company (the makers of the product) even if not by the doctors.
I had been lied to and my concerns about his immunisations were never followed up in any way. They were met with denials and due to my blind faith in the medical profession I didn’t question.
I have since gone on to read hundreds of books, some written by very courageous doctors who have bothered to investigate this issue thoroughly, read medical journals and also watched some DVD’s done by doctors all to warn parents about the dangers of vaccination.
I have 3 healthy, totally unvaccinated children, who have never had a childhood disease. Unlike their vaccinated friends who have often succumb to the diseases they have been vaccinated against. I kept these children fit and well using what is provided by nature – natural foods, clean water,
sunshine, clean air, exercise, adequate sleep and a loving and nurturing environment.
A few simple facts for people to check out:
1. Japan stopped vaccinating young babies and their SIDs rate plummeted to near none. SIDS in Australia mostly happens at 2, 4 and 6 months – a coincidence – I think not, some will definitely be vaccination deaths!
2. The U.S.A. has paid out billions in compensation for vaccine injury. Why do doctors here deny it is happening – are they scared of being sued?
3. There is absolutely NO SCIENTIFIC PROOF a raised antibody level equals immunity. Apparently doctors want scientific proof of reactions, yet there is no scientific proof a raised antibody level gives immunity. There is proof it does not, when most of the cases of whooping cough are in the vaccinated as they are for this current epidemic.
It saddens me to know there are thousands of babies out there being damaged, disabled or lost every year and they have no voice to stand up against the powerful drug companies and, what is now an industry, and scarcely a profession – medicine.
I suggest you all look up the definition of safe and effective. You will soon learn it does not say what doctors and drug companies would have us believe. While we have a system when vaccine side effects are denied and played down and the risk of the disease is exaggerated we will never really know the true risk / benefit ratio. But remember, the risk was 100% when damage happens to your child!
There is so much information out there now from people who do not have a vested interest in vaccinations – I suggest you look into it thoroughly and put your fears to one side.
Education conquers fear.
If my son’s purpose on this earth was to teach me to be a better, more responsible parent, he succeeded. Had he not lived and died, I would possibly still be the complacent parent I was when I took him to be immunised. For that, I, and his brothers and sister are forever in his debt. Maybe one day, I’ll get to thank him. In the meantime I wonder what he would be like today. When I was placing a 21st key around his headstone I could only be sorry I wasn’t placing it around his neck.
My unvaccinated children are alive and well and my vaccinated child is dead! That’s what I know and live with every day.
Yours in health and wellbeing,
Stephanie Messenger

Vaccination: What Parents Need to Understand



Image result for screenshot

If a parent is vaccinating their child, these are just some facts they need to understand.
1. I understand that the pharmaceutical company who made this vaccine has NO liability if it injures or kills my child. 
2. If my child is killed or hurt by a vaccine, the public will pay through a fund created from a 75 cent tax that's added onto every vaccine given out for any damage the vaccine does. We the people pay...not the pharmaceutical companies.
2.1 I understand that there is a cap on injury/death compensation.
2.2 I understand that even if VICP admits that your child was injured or killed because of a vaccine, that is not a guarantee that they will compensate you for the injury/loss. 
They have set criteria that your injury/loss must fit into in order to qualify.
3. I understand that this vaccine contains neurotoxins such as aluminum that far exceeds "safe levels" deemed by the EPA.
4. I understand that this vaccine contains carcinogenic ingredients.
5. I understand that some vaccines are made from aborted fetal cell lines, of both humans and animals.
6. I understand that getting this vaccine does not ensure that I will be protected from the disease.
7. I understand that my child could get the very disease she/he was vaccinated for and that some vaccines contain the very live virus, the public is told to avoid at all costs.
8. I understand that my child could be a carrier of the disease she/he was vaccinated for and spread it ("shedding") for up to six weeks.
9. I understand that my doctor may get monetarily rewarded for having a high percentage of his/her patients who are fully vaccinated. (Incentive Program)
10. I understand that if my child is injured by a vaccine, my doctor would have to spend an exorbitant amount of hours filling out paper work in order to report it.
11. I understand that my doctor has no incentive to fill out paperwork for a vaccine injury.
12. I understand that vaccine injury is under-reported.
13. I understand that any human injuring a child via vaccination, regardless of profession, has very little incentive to report a child/infant injury/death caused directly by that human.
14. I understand that pharmaceutical companies have no incentive to make their product better, because they hold no personal liability regarding any damages the vaccine does to child or adult alike.
15. I understand that pharmaceutical companies spend up to 4x more on advertising than they do on research.
16. I understand that corporate media gets 70% of their advertising revenue from pharmaceutical companies.
17. I understand that corporate media does not want to lose revenue, certainly not 70% of it.
18. I understand that when pharmaceutical companies conduct a study (on their own product) it is in their best interest to have a favorable outcome.
19. I understand that the current vaccine schedule has never been tested on children.
20. I understand that this vaccine could cause injury or death, and my child could be one of them. 
I understand that the vaccine injury or vaccine induced death are listed side effects on each vaccine insert and that most medical professionals purposely hide the vaccine insert from patients, even though it's the law to provide it for viewing before a vaccine is administered.
21. My doctor has informed me on all the risks and side effects and has reviewed the vaccine insert with me.
22. I understand that if my child dies from this vaccine I will be awarded no more than $250,000. 
This figure is established because of previous awards given to parents already, where a vaccine killed their child. 
23. I am making an informed choice to vaccinate my child.
24. I understand vaccines have NEVER been proven to improve immunity above not vaccinating and that this one study, which would cost very little time and money to conduct, is the ONLY study governments and vaccine makers REFUSE to do. 
25. I understand that because no research exists to prove vaccines improve immunity, I'm vaccinating my child based on factors, other than the proven research. 
Although many reasons can be cited for vaccinating, from blind faith to not having enough time to get informed, having research to prove that vaccines are safe and effective can't be a reason to vaccinate because that research simply doesn't exist. 
I understand I'm vaccinating for reasons having nothing to do with the research. 
26. I understand that I'm placing my trust in an institution that's PROVEN to lie and manipulate the public, when it comes to the health of my child, regarding an unproven medical procedure that has already caused death and permanent injury in other children.
~Nick Catone (UFC Fighter)

To Heal Disease Clean the Terrain


Image result for germ theory vs terrain theory
At least once a day I am confronted by someone who believes their dis-ease or condition is so unique and so advanced and so severe, and they believe they are so well educated about their dis-ease or condition that no one can tell them anything about it that they don't already know. After all, they have been living with it for years or even all their life and have read every study ever done and sought out every solution one could imagine.
When I suggest detoxification to heal their body to them, they tell me that "there is no way in hell that their dis-ease or condition could EVER be cured by a change in diet!" They laugh at the thought and argue to the death that healing for them would be impossible. What they don't realize is that they are dismissing something they really know nothing about. It isn't about the food, although a change in diet IS necessary to heal the body. It is about the body's ability to heal itself, something they have never been taught or experienced. Or have they?
When they sliced their finger with a knife, the cut bled and hurt, but within a few days it was healed. It is the same way on the inside of the body. But people have never seen that, so they don't know that. The fact is, as humans we are all the same. We all have approximately 100 trillion cells and two major fluids in our body: blood and lymphatic fluid. The only differences in our bodies are our levels of lymphatic constipation (toxicity and overacidity) and our inherited glandular weaknesses.
Our dis-eases and conditions are caused by toxicity, overacidity and inherited glandular weaknesses. The only way to get these toxins and acids out is to detoxify the body. I don't mean for a few days or a week or a month. It can take up to 5-10 years to clean out your body's lymphatic system to remove these toxins, acids, parasites including yeasts, fungi, warts, viruses, bacteria overloads, worms of all types, flukes, molds, sulfur, spirochetes, damaged cells, chemical medications, etc., etc., and all the obstructions that prevent healing from naturally occurring. You must also rebuild your inherited glandular weaknesses.
Detoxification also corrects digestion, absorption, utilization and elimination. Detoxification isn't about nutrition coming in which supposedly strengthens the body; it is about getting rid of that which weakens it. Detoxification isn't just a cleansing experience; it is a rebuilding one as well. You must strengthen and rebuild your weakened organs and glands. Without detoxification TRUE healing cannot take place.
Rx drugs and treatments are acids in the body that do further damage. They suppress symptoms, push and stuff the acids and toxins deeper into the tissues (only to emerge again later) and can never truly heal correctly because they do not address the cause. There is no cure in treatment-based thinking. Big Pharma and the Medical Mafia is a multi-trillion dollar a year industry that wants to keep you as a customer for life, so they tell you that you MUST take drugs to live, when in truth these chemicals are slowly killing you. The sick care industry is not about health at all. It is about huge profits...PERIOD.
Nutrition and adding supplements to your body will never cure anything...ever! That is also treatment-based thinking. It's what you must remove from your body and eliminate from your diet that will heal you.
Dis-eases and conditions will vanish when you clean the terrain.
It was NEVER about the germs or about the bacteria; it is about the culturing medium: the terrain. - Karen Lee"
By Shane Keshken

Friday, June 22, 2018

Why the Bridge Course must go.


Image result for herbs images

Dear A....,

I see in AYUSH a huge potential to overcome the shortfalls of modern day practice. This is provided these courses are rescued from the clutches of modern thinking that forces them to view disease as per disease names set by the allopathic fraternity. Each AYUSH modality has a distinct way of thinking and helping people at several levels provided they are allowed to pursue that mode of thinking.

Today sincere AYUSH practitioners are fighting the system and trying to get back to basics so that they can begin anew. The ayurvedic practitioners are abandoning modern ayurvedic texts to return to the original books and thereby they are both gaining in knowledge and helping people overcome illness. The homeopaths are going back to Hahnemann's Organon and we now have authors who have published wonderful books based on them that are shaping young minds. Sowa Rigpa is a wonderful science that has kept its focus on esoteric aspects of disease that the pioneer ayurveds had developed. Naturopathy and yoga is a blessing for the masses as food and the elements become methods for healing. Unani is an offshoot of ayurveda that the Muslims can relate to and accept wholeheartedly.

I sincerely hope we all should understand this and allow these holistic methods their space and freedom with all the respect they deserve. It is not wise to intrude into their territory and judge them without understanding their philosophy and methods. 

The sincere AYUSH practitioners are fighting the Bridge Course tooth and nail and so are officials in institutions like CCRH, CCRAS, CCRYN and the like. The Bridge Course will lead to erosion of health both of practitioners and populations as the holistic philosophy will once again be ignored. The present graduate and post graduate level courses already have scope for many basic methods that modern medicine has to offer and which the holistic practitioners can selectively adopt based upon their decisions considering the long term impact on health.

We all need AYUSH. We are all human beings subject to decay and disease. We all need relief. We all need options. Why infringe on that basket of choice? We know the limitations of prevalent medical science very well and we all are fighting deficiencies in the system. 

We know what forces we are up against. The words health and cure are dirty words because they present a frightening scenario of loss of revenue and growth. Opening up bridge courses encourages these very forces as they can then extend their market to rural areas. The prime reason for quacks and AYUSH practitioners using modern drugs and diagnostics is because representatives visit them and offer them their perks and services. They are also being manipulated to refer their patients to private hospitals and practitioners promising a steady flow of revenue. 

Rather we must broaden the scope of AYUSH such that people can exclusively depend on them according to their level of knowledge and their thinking on health. There can be no compulsions in civilized society and neither should we be judgmental from a position of power. 

I hope you can relate to what I am trying to say.

With regards,
Jagannath

When Mercury in Vaccines Aggravates Existing Conditions to Create Autism


Subcommittee on Human Rights and Wellness, Washington, DC, September
2004
https://lawrencebroxmeyermd.wordpress.com/2017/08/11/vaccines-as-an-autism-trigger-a-tb-link-2/ 

The following excerpts are from the transcript of the “Hearing before the Subcommittee on Human Rights and Wellness of the Committee on Government Reform, House of Representatives, One Hundred Eighth Congress, Second Session, September 8, 2004”.8
[The Subcommittee’s Chairman, Congressman Dan Burton (R-Indiana), is thanking Dr Melinda Wharton, Acting Deputy Director of the National Immunization Program, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, for her opening testimony.]

Mr Burton: Thank you for your testimony. Everybody knows the value of vaccinations. And every time you testify, you tell us how valuable they’ve been. And we already know that.

We’re not here to say that vaccinations aren’t important. They’re very important. They’ve given us the highest quality of life of any civilization in the history of mankind. That isn’t what we’re talking about. We’re talking about why they’re putting mercury in vaccinations and why it’s never been tested since 1929 when Lilly developed it.

[Congressman Burton turns his attention to Dr William Egan, the Acting Director of the Office of Vaccines Research and Review, Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research, Food and Drug Administration (FDA).]

Mr Burton: Has thimerosal ever really been tested? Has thimerosal ever been tested by our health agencies?

Mr Egan: Only in those early tests that you know of that were done by Lilly.

Mr Burton: When was that? That was done in 1929. Let’s follow-up on that. In 1929, they tested this on 27 people that were dying of meningitis. All of those people died of meningitis, so they said there was no correlation between their death and the mercury in the vaccines. That is the only test that’s ever been done on thimerosal that I know of. Can you think of any other?

Mr Egan: No, in people, no. Except for accidental exposures over time.

Mr Burton: So we have mercury that’s being put into people’s bodies in the form of this preservative, and has been since the 1930s, and it’s never been tested by our health agencies. And yet you folks come here and you testify that there’s no conclusive evidence, and the IOM [Institute of Medicine] says, they favor, get this, they don’t say they’re sure, they say they favor rejection of a causal relationship between mercury and autism and other neurological disorders. Nobody ever gives a categorical statement, that no, mercury does not cause this, no, it doesn’t. And that’s because you can’t do it…

Mr Egan: We are diligently working, as we have testified today and previously, toward eliminating thimerosal mercury from vaccines as quickly as can be done. But there are many issues that are involved in doing this. If we were to say tomorrow that all vaccines, for example, all flu vaccines could only be administered in single dose syringes or single dose vials [thus eliminating the need for thimerosal], the capacity to fill those does not exist…

Mr Burton: OK. Now, my grandson got nine shots in one day, seven of which contained mercury. So if he got the very small amount, he’d be getting maybe nine micrograms, right?

Mr Egan: No, much less than that. Because the maximum that we calculate that a child could receive now during the first six months of life is somewhat less than three. A number of these vaccines [have] defined trace as less than one, some of them have considerably less than one.

Mr Burton: But that amount of mercury would not do any neurological damage to anybody?
Mr Egan: Not according to any guideline.
Mr Burton: No, no, no, no. I want you to say yes or no.
Mr Egan: I do not believe so.
Mr Burton: You do not believe so. I didn’t say believe. Can you say to me right now that amount of mercury being injected into a baby will not hurt it?
Mr Egan: It’s impossible to make those categorical statements with 100 percent—
Mr Burton: That’s right. So it is possible that the amount of mercury that’s being injected, even in trace amounts, could damage a child neurologically, right?
Mr Egan: I don’t think it has that capacity, no. We can argue.
Mr Burton: I know, but you don’t think it is, but you can’t say categorically, can you?
Mr Egan: Do I have evidence for every single child, for every possible dose, the answer is no…
As it turns out, the doses of thimerosal referenced in micrograms cited by Egan were small change compared to what is in certain current multidose flu shots.9 The CDC’s 2014–2015 guidelines for eligible child influenza vaccinations advise: “To protect their health, all children 6 months and older should be vaccinated against the flu each year.”10 With some multidose influenza preparations containing as high as 25 micrograms per dose of thimerosal or higher, this can add up to a lot of thimerosal. And on top of this, concurrently, the CDC still insists: “Pregnant? Get a Flu Shot!”11
Congressman Burton had established, as of 2004, that the only study ever done to conclude that thimerosal was not neurotoxic or could not precipitate the first signs and symptoms of autism was done by its manufacturer, Ely Lilly, in 1929—a study in which 22 meningitis patients (not 27, as Congressman Burton mentioned) in an Indianapolis epidemic were treated with thimerosal, all of whom died.
Lilly showcased and funded the study for one reason and one reason only: its scientist Smithburn, the study’s lead author, out of the sheer desperation of having nothing with which to cure his patients, had injected 22 of those patients dying of meningitis with large doses of thimerosal (up to 10 milligrams per kilogram intravenously) with supposedly no significantly grave consequences.12 That is, no grave consequences other than the fact that seven out of 22 of Smithburn’s patients died within one day after receiving the thimerosal. Only one patient made it to day 62 before succumbing—hardly enough of a window to investigate for chronic mercury damage from the thimerosal. Nevertheless, Lilly would next try to turn a lemon into an orange, sponsoring other scientists13 to say that the thimerosal had nothing to do with the deaths of Smithburn’s meningitis patients.
Unknown to either Burton or Egan, there was one other study testing a mercury compound on humans—a sizeable series which also appeared in the same publication, The Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA), which had published the Lilly study. Hartz14, looking for a cure for his chronic TB patients, concluded that his trial with a mercury compound was “positively injurious and detrimental to one afflicted with tuberculosis”. Of the 14 patients to whom Hartz administered six or more injections (consisting of 1/5 gram or 13-milligram doses every second day), 12 died within from two weeks to six months after their last injection. Hartz was only using a small fraction of what Smithburn had used, yet his results for those on the receiving end of multiple injections of the mercury compound were disastrous. Hartz wrote:15
“This enormous percentage of deaths, namely, 85.7 per cent, among those [TB] patients who received six or more injections [of mercury], can be attributed only to the use of mercury, simply from the fact that the expectation of life in many of the cases chosen was very favorable indeed. In fact, on account of the age of the patients and the chronic arrested type of the disease, they were the kind of patients who live long and have a favorable prognosis.”
Also unknown to the scientists and the congressman present at the hearing was that although the 1929 Lilly investigators purportedly had an epidemic of meningococcal meningitis on their hands, as the epidemic wore on they were considering it as having originated as a mixed infection with an underlying tubercular infection—making the Hartz and Lilly publications have more in common than might at first meet the eye. It was an era when Mycobacterium tuberculosis and Neisseria meningitidis (the meningococcus) were the two most common causative organisms responsible for meningitis.16 And to this day, TB meningitis is in the differential rule-out for meningococcal meningitis.17
In back-to-back studies of the Indianapolis outbreak of 1929, Smithburn, present in the initial investigation, left the second-phase probe to Kempf, Gilman and Zerfas.18 Both publications showed how anti-meningococcal serums were of little or no use for the Indianapolis outbreak—an unexpected finding for a meningococcal meningitis epidemic.
The actual genesis of meningococcal disease was and still is not fully understood. Meningococcus colonises large numbers in the general population harmlessly, with only a very small percentage of individuals having serious illness from it—notably in the limbs and the brain. Front and centre in the follow-up study done by Smithburn’s colleagues was a mysterious “micrococcus” found in both phases of the Indianapolis outbreak. Just prior to Lilly’s publications, a similar micrococcus was uncovered by Sweany19, also published in JAMA, and subsequently by Mellon and Fisher20 in The Journal of Infectious Diseases. But both Sweany and Mellon’s micrococcus proved to be a (pleomorphic) form of cell-wall-deficient (CWD) tuberculosis (see figure 1 for an example of CWD TB). According to Kempf et al.:21
“The fact that the meningococcus could not be recovered from the blood, spinal fluid or nasopharynx does not necessarily mean that it was not there. However, it [the mysterious micrococcus] was readily recovered from the few meningococcic [meningococcal] cases that we have observed during the last few months and during the first and second years of this epidemic. One might expect to find an organism of this nature in traumatic meningitis or as a complication in tuberculosis…”
As he left the congressional hearing, very much on Congressman Dan Burton’s mind, after having grilled the FDA’s Dr William Egan, was that despite promises time and again to remove mercury from vaccines it never seemed to happen.
Figure 1: One of the stealth, viral-like forms of “cell-wall-deficient” atypical tuberculosis colonies that grew from the brain of a child who expired from the disease. Such forms of tuberculosis are extremely difficult to detect and require special stains and culture media not used routinely in today’s laboratories.
(Source: Korsak, T., Acta Tuberc. Pneumol. Belg. 1975; 66[6]:445-469)
Uncommon Valour
“My name is William Thompson. I am a Senior Scientist with the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, where I have worked since 1998. I regret that my coauthors and I omitted statistically significant information in our 2004 article published in the journal Pediatrics. The omitted data suggested that African American males who received the MMR vaccine before age 36 months were at increased risk for autism. Decisions were made regarding which findings to report after the data were collected, and I believe that the final study protocol was not followed…”22
On 27 August 2014, CDC scientist Dr William Thompson spoke out, admitting that he had co-authored a study23 which purposely cooked the data to avoid showing that African-American infants and toddlers given the MMR (measles, mumps, rubella) vaccine before 36 months of age were at a 340 per cent increased risk for coming down with autism. At the time of the study, and for a decade after, Thompson was silenced—but troubled. This was no average witness; this was a man who knew the intricacies of the study and the original data obtained like the back of his hand.
Obviously, the CDC’s doctored 2004 study was an attempt to clear the MMR vaccine of troublesome implications—an attempt to give the vaccine a clean bill of health. But if the study’s purpose was to examine honestly the possibility of a causal relationship between the MMR vaccine and autism, it failed miserably.
After Thompson came out, the CDC’s Director of Immunization Safety and Thompson’s co-author, Dr Frank DeStefano, defended the study as originally published. But Thompson was already on record. Thompson believed that the removal of some of the study’s subjects because of the lack of a Georgia birth certificate not only went against the original study protocol, but, by reducing the study size by 41 per cent, obscured the strong statistical association between the timing of the MMR vaccination and the appearance of autism in African-American male toddlers. DeStefano was lead investigator in the 2004 paper. Subsequently, DeStefano had a telephone interview with investigative reporter Sharyl Attkisson.24 Here are a few verbatim excerpts from their exchange:
Attkisson: Were you aware of any of his [whistleblower William Thompson’s] concerns of, you know, have you been aware before today of any of his concerns about this?
DeStefano: Uh, uh, yeah, I mean I’ve continued to see, uh, uh, see him for over the past ten years and we’ve interacted fairly frequently, and, uh, uh, no I wasn’t aware of this.
Attkisson: So whoever he raised his concerns to, he didn’t, he didn’t raise it to you or anybody you knew of?
DeStefano: No, I mean the last time I saw him was probably about two months ago, and he didn’t mention anything about this…
[Ms Attkisson turns up the heat, relating to lead author DeStefano, that she thought that leaving out anything in the results of the study, especially through a birth certificate criterion which went against the study’s protocol, didn’t seem appropriate. It was also hiding the true conclusion of the study, which otherwise found a 340 per cent increase in autism in black children given the MMR before 36 months.]
Attkisson: …I still think it would be pretty important to know…
[DeStefano’s reply below apparently was his way of deflecting Attkisson’s probing comment by saying that autism probably developed in the womb before 36 months anyway and that somehow this meant that an MMR vaccination given before 36 months was already too late for the vaccine to cause or precipitate the first signs of autism.]
DeStefano: No, I mean, I think, you know, the other, the other important consideration here is looking at what, what time period we’re talking about. We’re, you know, autism, as you probably are aware, is a condition that really probably has its start while the child is still in the womb. And, you know, it doesn’t, some of the behaviors and such don’t come apparent, become apparent until maybe the child is one, two, three years old. But, uh, uh, what we know about autism that, uh, the, uh, characteristics or behavioral signs do become ava–, you know, apparent by 24 months of age, so. So we had different cut-offs, before 18 months of age, there was no difference in, in any group in terms of, uh, vaccination levels, between the cases and controls. At 24 months of age, when, uh, au—you know—behaviors of autism or some features of autism become apparent, there was no difference between the, uh, cases and controls in any group, it was at 36 months where there was a slight differen—and the difference was, we’re talking about a difference between 93% versus 91%, not a, a big difference. But, so that’s at 36 months. And at 36 months, an exposure around that time period is just not biologically plausible to have a uh, uh, a causal association with autism. I mean autism would’ve already started by then…
Attkisson: Let me just, let me just interrupt, before I lose that thought. So you already made up your mind regardless of what the stats show that if it, certain things show that it didn’t make sense, you wouldn’t, you would try to find out a way to…
DeStefano: No, that’s not what we said. I’m just saying, you know, you interpret, you interpret findings, also, you know, there’s the statistics, then you have to also interpret, bring in things like biological plausibility, how do you interpret these results? So I think we had pretty strong evidence that these results at 36 months were primarily a reflection of requirements to attend early intervention special education programs for the, for the children with autism…
Attkisson: Is there any possibility that it is biologically plausible and you just haven’t, you know, that that’s, the consensus is that it’s not, among you guys, but that it is and you’re overlooking that?
DeStefano: I’m, I’m not aware of any data that would say, you know, that would s-, you know, that would say that, uh, you would have, um, onset of autism after 36 months.
Granted DeStefano’s remark that “autism, as you probably are aware, is a condition that really probably has its start while the child is still in the womb”, which many believe, what did this have to do with a vaccine like MMR exacerbating or bringing on the first signs or symptoms of an autism, perhaps from chronic infection first acquired in the womb—even if the vaccination was given just before 36 months of age? Moreover, now that the real results of the 2004 autism–vaccine study were revealed, why did they show a 340 per cent increase in young black children given the MMR before age 36 months? Autism is certainly not more prevalent in African-American children than in whites. In fact, the rates of autism in black children are considerably less.25
Sir William Osler, co-founder of Johns Hopkins Hospital and frequently described as the Father of Modern Medicine, mentioned that “a quiescent malady” such as congenital syphilis and tuberculosis “may be lighted into activity by vaccination”.26 So, perhaps the differential with the MMR might lie in the racial differential in one of the diseases which Osler mentioned. The CDC’s own statistics, for example, show that the percentage of tuberculosis in blacks is way out of proportion to their percentage in the US population, with TB rates being seven times higher in blacks than in whites.27
The MMR, then, could very well be acting adversely in the fashion described by Osler through statistical evidence alone—but there was much, much more.
Exhibit 1: Known Contents of the MMR Vaccine
Of all the issues of concern regarding a vaccination–autism link, one of the most prominent is, according to Sugarman28, the continued use of thimerosal in certain influenza shots, especially the widely used and economical multidose influenza vials through which many patients can be vaccinated using the same vial of influenza vaccine. Most of the legal battles over vaccines and autism, Sugarman mentions, have alleged that the first signs and symptoms of autism were precipitated by this mercury-containing preservative, which used to be an ingredient in many childhood vaccines and still is found in some of the multidose flu shots used by paediatricians.
Others have argued that the culprit is the measles, mumps and rubella vaccine (MMR) or perhaps MMR in combination with thimerosal. Yet in many other autistic cases, a direct causal link is not there for either. Nevertheless, the thought lingers that these agents as well as other vaccines could, in certain cases, still trigger the first signs and symptoms of autism. In the meantime, the lay term pointing to “toxins” in the vaccines is inadequate.
Whenever one deals with biologicals originating from the cow, the calf, the chicken, the chicken embryo, the swine or from another human in the form of albumen or a foetal cell line—all found in the MMR—one hits upon the potential of such biologicals used in the vaccine bearing or being contaminated by mycobacterial infection. This holds particularly true of a vaccine like MMR, whose components can potentially carry Mycobacterium tuberculosis from human fluids or tissue, Mycobacterium avium from poultry (a subspecies of which is Mycobacterium paratuberculosis) or Mycobacterium bovis from cows or the foetal tissue of cows. And in this case, we are not talking about mere environmental exposure: we are talking about direct injection through vaccination.
To say that the US Department of Health and Human Services’ Food and Drug Administration is aware of this is a stark understatement. One just need download its “Guidance for Industry”29 for viral vaccines—a 50-page paper—each page carefully framed under the heading “Contains Nonbinding Recommendations”. In such a “Guidance for Industry”, the words and warnings for human Mycobacterium tuberculosis as well as mycobacteria from animal sources are scattered throughout.
The MMR vaccine is generally administered to children around the age of one year (12 months), with a second dose before starting school (i.e., at age 4–5).
MMR is front-loaded with such entities as foetal bovine serum (FBS). Foetal bovine serum or foetal calf serum is the blood fraction remaining after the natural coagulation of blood, followed by centrifugation to remove any remaining red blood cells. FBS comes from the blood drawn from a bovine foetus via a closed system of collection at the slaughterhouse.30
This presents a problem.
Johne was the first to report a case of congenital TB in animals, his specimen consisting of the very same bovine foetus.31Macroscopically though, he noted, the uterus and placenta of the pregnant cow were normal.
Autism has already been linked to be triggered in certain cases by an atypical tuberculosis called paratuberculosis, frequently found in cattle.32 A critical review found that this same form of tuberculosis can infect bovine cow foetuses about nine per cent of the time when the bovine mother has subclinical disease, and an average of 39 per cent of cow foetuses in cases where the expectant cow shows signs of clinical paratubercular disease.33
Industry Turns a Blind Eye
Once the most prevalent infectious disease of cattle in the US, yet today largely ignored and purportedly no longer nearly the problem it once was, bovine TB caused more losses among US farm animals in the early part of the 20th century than all other infectious diseases combined.34
By 1917, the situation had become so grave in hogs and cattle that the Cooperative State–Federal Tuberculosis Eradication Program, administered by the US Department of Agriculture (USDA) and the Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS), had to be instituted. For in 1917, it was estimated that 25 per cent of deaths from tuberculosis in adult humans were caused by animal tuberculosis.35
Although it is claimed that in the United States TB “once was” a common disease of farm poultry flocks, cattle, swine and people, this author remains unimpressed with present governmental agency attempts to diagnose both the bacilli and, moreover, their predominant cell-wall-deficient forms.
As another strategy to hide the true incidence of TB, our domestic animals and poultry are often killed young before the onset of tubercular disease becomes obvious.36 Furthermore, most inspection is done visually.
In the meantime, the USDA continues to downplay and ignore the actual incidence of TB not only in cows and their milk (especially with regard to paratuberculosis) but in poultry and eggs. For example, when forced to address the issue of finding paratuberculosis in containers of milk, the USDA initiated a study in 1998, but first used methods like freezing and ultrasound to damage the very mycobacteria being tested for, and then ignored established techniques to isolate mycobacteria related to TB, growing samples on a culture medium which was considered inadequate—and for not nearly a long enough time.37, 38 Not surprisingly, the USDA results in that study were all negative.
MMR vaccine also contains WI-38 human lung fibroblasts. A fibroblast is the most common type of cell found in our connective tissue. Although no study has addressed the possibility of mycobacteria contaminating such fibroblasts, Higuchi et al. in 2002 found that the all too common and dangerous strain of tuberculosis H37Rv can invade and grow in a WI-38 foetal cell line quite efficiently.39
Actually, WI-38 is a human cell culture line composed of fibroblasts which were derived from the lung tissue of a three-month-old white female foetus. It is commercially known as “WI-38 (ATCC® CCL-75™)”. First sequestered by Hayflick and Moorhead40 in the 1960s, WI-38 has been used ever since in the production of many of our vaccines.
Finally, in the MMR we have the chick embryo cell culture used to propagate the mumps and rubella (German measles) viruses.
Although authorities seem totally unconcerned today, Hull41, Trylich42 and Romanenko43 all certainly saw the danger of tuberculosis from tubercular hens getting into embryonated chicken eggs.
Chick embryo cell cultures also consist of hydrolysed gelatin as well as human albumen. Hydrolysed gelatin is the hydrolysed connective tissue from an animal—usually from the skin and bones of an animal, generally a pig. The process involves adding enzymes which break down the proteins. It separates the proteins along hydrogen bonds. Then the foetal calf serum from the blood drawn from a bovine foetus through a closed system at a slaughterhouse is also added.
Against all of this you have the antibiotic neomycin added to the MMR in an attempt to contend with any unknown mycobacterial content in the vaccine—which neomycin by itself is totally unequipped to do.
Almost lost in the package insert of Merck’s popular MMR II vaccine is the admission that no studies have been reported to date of the effect of the measles virus vaccine in the MMR on untreated tuberculous children: “However, individuals with active untreated tuberculosis should not be vaccinated.”44 Although infants and children are “individuals”, so difficult is it to isolate TB in them that some paediatric experts recommend a spinal tap in all children under 12 months of age.45 Yet it is specifically at 12 months of age that mandatory MMR vaccination first cuts in.
The Science of Denial
“They believe that TB is an extinct disease. I don’t know why.”46 So said Mario Raviglione, MD, infectious diseases specialist and Director of the World Health Organization’s Global Tuberculosis Programme about a disease which WHO admits infects a third of the world.
While frontal assaults on thimerosal, the MMR vaccine and the overburdened vaccine schedule have justifiably sprung up, a satisfactory and comprehensive explanation as to why and how vaccines might trigger autism has not.
In a 2013 interview, Mel Spigelman, MD, President and CEO of the TB Alliance, a nonprofit TB drug research group based in New York, said of tuberculosis: “It’s still in the US, we just don’t recognize it.”47 Perhaps this is because we just don’t want to recognise it—in ourselves, in our livestock, in the products from our livestock, and in the biologicals used in our vaccine manufacture. But it won’t let us not recognise it.
Meanwhile, we have with tuberculosis one of the few diseases that could possibly account for the soaring rate of autism—a disease which is not only the most common cause of infectious death in children48 but, according to WHO, in their child-bearing mothers aged 15–44, one million of whom die from it each year49; a disease which is extremely neurotropic (nerve-seeking) and remains, worldwide, the most common type of central nervous system infection, particularly among children50; and a disease in which 20–25 per cent of such children can manifest mental retardation as well as other anomalies often associated with neurodevelopmental disorders and the autistic spectrum.51
By 2007, Rzhetsky, in a proof-of-concept biostatistical analysis of 1.5 million patient records, had found significant genetic overlap in victims of autism and those with TB.52
No one who has done a serious study of the literature, old and new, can doubt for a second that the incidence and transfer of maternal tuberculosis, even when there are no maternal symptoms and the disease is latent, are being grossly underestimated. This has been duly noted in recent publications, but more in depth in the past writings and solid research of Charles C. Norris, Pennsylvania physician, gynaecologist, obstetrician and medical investigator. Norris wrote:53
“Pregnancy is prone to light up a latent or chronic tuberculosis, and thus produce a condition in which a bacillemia [blood-borne infection] is likely to be present. Secondary infection and metastasis [by TB] occur in the placenta in the same manner in which they affect other portions of the body.”
“Baumgarten’s theory…has done much to show that congenital tuberculosis may occur, and that tubercle bacilli may remain latent in the child for quite prolonged periods. It has been shown that the tubercle bacillus may remain latent for some time. Under such circumstances congenital tuberculosis is probably mistaken for, and classified as, a postnatal infection [of childhood].”
“Undoubtedly the strong uterine contractions incident to labor constitute a most important factor in the transmission of tubercle bacilli at the end of pregnancy. Organisms that, prior to the onset of labor, were lodged in the placenta or in the intervillous spaces, may, as the result of these contractions, be forced into the fetal circulation. Schlimpert, Schmorl and Geipel, Warthin and Cowie, Dardeleben, and others are very insistent on this point.”
Thus, throughout the first half of the 20th century, the method of choice for an expectant mother with proven TB—if it was found—was early termination of pregnancy.54
Others, like Norris, also saw the possibility of maternal– foetal transfer of even non-symptomatic TB as not uncommon.55-59 Dr Henry William Welch, often called the Dean of American Medicine and a colleague of Osler at Johns Hopkins, was already on record as saying that the mere inability to pick up TB in the foetus or newborn wasn’t an argument against frequent transmission to them.60 There were just too many factors involved, such as the hostile, low-oxygen environment of foetal blood, which could tame even the most virulent TB bacilli into dormant forms for some time, making diagnosis difficult to impossible. The history of associating what we presently call “autism” with tuberculosis is an old one, going back to John Langdon Down, a subset of whose young patients clearly were the first cases of “autism” on record. Such associations persist.61-63
While a blanket statement that vaccinations cause autism cannot be supported, the assertion that certain vaccines can aggravate and precipitate the first signs of an autism originating from chronic disease cannot be denied. A vaccine or group of vaccinations could trigger autism simply by inadvertently introducing, through their human, animal and poultry components, mycobacterial elements into the mother, foetus or young child. Mixed tubercular infection in man with human and fowl TB isn’t a new discovery: Tsukamura and Mizuno64 found it rather commonly in their 1981 study. Once introduced, one tubercular form can potentiate and make more virulent an existing tubercular infection.
Another way in which vaccine components can trigger autism was laid out by Hartz in his JAMA probe regarding how mercury compounds like thimerosal activate and make much worse an existing tubercular infection.
Finally, in vaccinations there are adjuvant oils or lipids, many of which do not have to be reported, used to increase a vaccine’s potency. Such oils or lipids are cholesterol precursors, becoming cholesterol in the body.65 Such a cholesterol surge is a big boost for any dormant systemic tuberculosis already in the body, whose very ability to maintain infection is linked to its ability to acquire and utilise cholesterol. So crucial is this unique ability of TB to use cholesterol in the body for both carbon and energy sources that if it were not for its ability to consume cholesterol, tuberculosis, unlike other pathogens, would be unable to resist eradication through cytokine attack and the attempts of certain activated white blood cells called macrophages to starve it of essential nutrients.66
In comparative and simpler terms, one might look at an injection of certain vaccine oil or lipid adjuvants, squalene among them, whether inside or outside of a vaccination, as lighting up chronic foci of tuberculosis like a Christmas tree; or, in the words of Sir William Osler, chronic tuberculosis “may be lighted into activity by vaccination”—for a few reasons, key to why vaccines, in certain cases, can trigger what a child’s parents clearly see as the first signs of autism in their toddler.
About the Author:
Pennsylvania internist and medical researcher Lawrence Broxmeyer, MD, was on the staff at NY affiliates of Downstate, Cornell and NYU for 14 years. He was the originator and lead author of a novel way to kill AIDS mycobacteria (J. Infectious Diseases 2002; 186[8]:1155-60). His ideas on phagotherapy are still in use today. He contributed a chapter to the textbook Patho-Biotechnology (Landes Bioscience, 2008). His peer-reviewed articles are on PubMed. He is the author of several books including AIDS: What the Discoverers of HIV Have Never Admitted (new edition, July 2014; see review in 20/01) and Autism: An Ancient Foe Becomes a Modern Scourge (2012). He has had several articles published in NEXUS: “Ebola…or African Strains of Tuberculosis” (22/01); “Influenza and the TB Connection” (19/01-02); and “The Untold Truth About Cancer” (17/01-02).
Dr Broxmeyer can be contacted by email at nyinstituteofmedicalresearch@ yahoo.com. For more information, visit http://lawrencebroxmeyermd.com.