About Vaccine Propaganda:
From Published Sources
False Placebos:
Faking Vaccine Safety Tests
Herd Immunity:
Lie of Community Immunity
Original Herd Immunity:
Unrelated to Vaccination
New Herd Immunity:
Getting Guilt Tripped
Illogical Herd Immunity:
Do Vaccines Work or NOT?
Coercive Herd Immunity:
95% Mandatory Compliance?
Boosting + Herd Immunity:
Children Boosting Adults?
Vaccine Hesistancy:
Cured by Mandates?
One Size Fits All?:
Unethical + Unfair
10,000 Vaccines:
Are You Kidding Me?
Immune Overload Theory:
Too Many Vaxxes, Too Soon
Vaccine Mystery:
Vaccines = Black Boxes
Group Think:
Applying Social Pressure
Four Dog Defense:
Tobacco Industry Tactics
Fear Appeal:
Getting Fear Tripped
Obstacles to Knowledge:
Falling Into Mental Traps
Disease Die Off:
False Credit to Vaccination
Always Anti-Vaxxers:
Vaccination Always Protested
Vaxxed vs Unvaxxed Study:
Unvaxxed = More Healthy
Intellectual Dishonesty:
American Pediatric Censorship
Doctor Herd Mentality:
Spectacular Medical Fails
Vaccine Fanaticism:
Crucifying Vaccine Heretics
Why are vaccines tested without using saline
or sugar as the placebo?
False placebos are the "old vaccines...
experimental vaccines... dangerous adjuvants which we know cause
neurotoxicity and death". False placebos are used because:
"when you test one poison against another poison, you do not have
a measureable outcome." Drug companies use false placebos to
prove their "product is safe [they] have to show that the death
rate (mortality) and rate of illness (morbidity) is similar to
the mortality and the morbidity that is already out there."
Toni Bark MD ("Vaccines Revealed")
What is the present theory of herd immunity?
I will let the Vaccines.gov explain:
"Community Immunity ('Herd Immunity')
(supposedly means that) vaccines can prevent outbreaks of disease
and save lives. When a critical portion of a community is
immunized against a contagious disease, most members of the
community are protected against that disease because there is
little opportunity for an outbreak. Even those who are not
eligible for certain vaccines — such as infants, pregnant women,
or immunocompromised individuals — get some protection because
the spread of contagious disease is contained. This... applies
to control of a variety of contagious diseases, including
influenza, measles, mumps, rotavirus, and pneumococcal disease."
What is the origin of herd immunity?
"The term, 'herd immunity', was coined
by researcher, A. W. Hedrich, after he had studied the epidemiology
of measles in USA between 1900-1931. His study published in the
May, 1933 American Journal of Epidemiology concluded that when
68% of children younger than 15 yrs old had become immune to
measles via infection, measles epidemics ceased."
Two things about this. One, this was
an observation about a population of UN-vaccinated children.
Two, another explanation for this is that by the 68% mark,
that particular wave of illness was dying down anyway!
What is the 'new' herd immunity?
This is the best explanation of the
"new" Herd Immunity that I have ever read:
Is it truly so that vaccinating protects
others, and that failing to vaccinate endangers others? For the
precious few with the courage to question the forced vaccination
propaganda, and accept the truth, based on credible, non-CDC
science, is no, or, more accurately, absolutely not... It is a
brilliant piece of marketing, using guilt to coerce behavior
and drive drug sales. It is twisted genius in action, making
intelligent, independent-thinking people ignore their honest,
well-founded vaccine skepticism, and causing the rest to accept
unlimited vaccinations without question."
Why is the 'new' herd immunity illogical?
If someone vaccinates themselves, that
immunity is created inside their own body and it cannot be given
to others and, therefore it cannot protect others. If "vaccines
save lives" then the person who is "protected" by vaccination is
"immune" to diseases and to any "threats" from unvaccinated.
It is impossible for one person to "boost" another with a vaccine.
Supposedly, vaccines are "fuel" for the immune system: if that
is true, then vaccines are like food. When I eat food in the US,
it does not feed people in other countries... nor do vaccines
from others protect me. I submit that vaccines are classic "Double
Think" (term popularized by George Orwell in 1984) which is
"the power of holding two contradictory
beliefs in one’s mind simultaneously, and accepting both of them"
as in "vaccines protect me from disease" BUT
"for vaccines to protect me, you have to get them too!" Either
vaccines protect someone or they do not regardless of what other
people do or do not do about vaccination.
What is the purpose of the 'new' herd
immunity?
Dr. Russell Blaylock said it best:
"...vaccine defenders insist the vaccines
(must) have 95% effectiveness rates. Without the mantra of herd
immunity, these public-health officials would not be able to
justify forced mass vaccinations. [For example], When I was a
medical student almost 40 years ago, it was taught that the
tetanus vaccine would last a lifetime. Then 30 years after it had
been mandated, we discovered that its protection lasted no more
than 10 years. Then, I ask my doubting physician if he or she has
ever seen a case of tetanus? Most have not. I then tell them to
look at the yearly data on tetanus infections – one sees no rise
in tetanus cases. The same can be said for measles, mumps, and
other childhood infections. It was, and still is, all a myth."
Do vaccinated children have the power
to "boost" unvaccinated adults?
In various documentaries online, you
constantly hear the phrase "boosting" mentioned. This is not the
kind of boosting as in 'you need to keep your vaccines up to date
such that new ones take over where old ones have worn off.' This
is another form of "Herd Immunity" in which many doctors say
that children who are vaccinated are protecting adults whose
vaccinations are old-expired-ineffective. I tried to find this
online... and it does not appear to exist. Yet while I was
searching for this I found a very interesting fact:
"Prior to the universal varicella (Chicken
Pox) vaccination program, 95% of adults experienced natural chickenpox
(usually as school aged children) — these cases were usually benign
and resulted in long term immunity. This high percentage of individuals
having long term immunity
has been compromised by mass vaccination
of children which provides at best 70 to 90%
immunity that is temporary and of unknown duration — shifting chickenpox
to a more vulnerable adult population where chickenpox carries
20 times more risk of death and 15 times more
risk of hospitalization
compared to children. Add to this the adverse
effects of both the chickenpox and shingles vaccines as well as the
potential for increased risk of shingles for an estimated 30 to 50
years among adults. The Universal Varicella (Chickenpox) Vaccination
Program now requires booster vaccines; however, these are
less effective than the natural immunity
that existed in communities prior to licensure
of the varicella vaccine.
How does 'vaccine hesistancy' support the
purpose of the 'new' herd immunity?
"Vaccine hesitancy refers to delay in
acceptance or refusal of vaccines despite availability of
vaccination services."
If you search further down on this
World Health Organization page, you will see that one of their
solutions to vaccine hesitancy is
"Mandating vaccinations / sanctions for
non-vaccination."
Why does "one size fits all" vaccination
not make sense?
As an old proverb goes, "one size does
not fit all because every one is not one size!" Each person is
unique: they come in different sizes with different genes and
therefore will react differently to any given vaccine.
Ask yourself: "Why are vaccines 'one size
fits all'? How did we go from 7 shots (24 doses) being 'fully
vaxxed' to 50 (69 doses) in ONE generation and not think twice
about the effects of all those chemicals and diseases being
injected to our children’s newly and still developing bodies,
and assume that there cannot possibly be ANY repercussions
from this? Why do so many choose to refuse to acknowledge that
possibility?"
The answer likely to be that "vaccine
propaganda" has stopped you from asking these questions.
What is the 10,000 Vaccine Theory?
In the October 2005, Parent's Pack
Newsletter from the Children's Hospital of Philadelphia, Dr. Paul
Offit stated, "Children have an enormous capacity to respond
safely to challenges to the immune system from vaccines. A baby's
body is bombarded with immunologic challenges - from bacteria in
food to the dust they breathe. Compared to what they typically
encounter and manage during the day, vaccines are literally a drop
in the ocean... in theory, healthy infants could safely get up to
10,000 vaccines at once." So if the natural immune system is so
strong, remind me, why do we need vaccines at all?
Here is a screenshot of this as the
original page was taken down.
What is the "Immune Overload Theory"?
The title is: "Study Links Vaccine Induced
Immune Overload to Autism, Diabetes, Obesity". The summary is that:
"[V]accine-induced immune overload is a driving factor in a number of
rapidly accelerating childhood epidemics including: autism, type 1
diabetes, asthma, food allergies, many auto-immune diseases, obesity,
type 2 diabetes, non-alcoholic fatty liver disease... (and) metabolic
disease."
This comes from "[g]iving a child multiple
vaccinations for different diseases at the same time increas[ing] the
risk of harmful side effects [that] can overload the immune system".
This is aggravated by the fact that
"[t]here are 'hot lots' of vaccine that have
been associated with more adverse events and deaths than others.
Parents should find the numbers of these lots and not allow their
children to receive vaccines from them."
Why are vaccines still a mystery?
Take the case of the Tuberculosis vaccine,
"In various clinical trials the estimates
of effectiveness [of the BCG vaccine] have ranged from 80%
protection to no benefit, and the reasons for these differences
are still not clearly understood."
Remind me again why we put so much faith
in clinical trials which are at the core of the religion of science?
If clinical trials can very so radically, can we trust them so blindly?
How does Group Think show up in the
vaccine industry?
If someone expresses an opinion that
is not "pro-vaccine all the way", they will find themselves
attacked by "pro-vaccine" group think. It works like this:
Illusions of invulnerability lead members
of the group to be overly optimistic and engage in risk-taking.
Pro-vaxxers will be the first to tell
you that vaccines make them invulnerable to illness and suffering.
They are so confident that vaccines are
100% safe and
effective
(despite evidence to the contrary) that
they bully others to take them as well.
Unquestioned beliefs lead members to
ignore possible moral problems and ignore consequences of
individual and group actions.
Pro-vaxxers refuse to believe that vaccines
cause any damage proclaiming that, for example,
"vaccines do not cause autism" when even
the US Federal government admits that it does.
| US Govt Study #1
| US Govt Study #2
| US Govt Study #3
Rationalizing prevents members from
reconsidering their beliefs and causes them to ignore warning
signs.
Pro-vaxxers will attribute any vaccine
damage that they observe in their personal lives to anything
other than vaccines. For example, they will believe that babies
who were developing normally turn autistic not due to vaccines
but due to bad genetics, bad parenting, etc.
Stereotyping leads members of the in-group
to ignore or even demonize out-group members who may oppose or
challenge the groups ideas.
If you are a parent who does not vaccinate
their child, you are a child abuser. If you are a coworker who
does not vaccinate, then you are not a team player. Applying
labels like this creates social pressure to get vaccinated.
Self-censorship causes people who might
have doubts to hide their fears or misgivings.
Many people live a life of regret
for having given their children vaccines which hurt them. My
mother often apologized for taking me to get the smallpox and
measles vaccines that BOTH nearly cost me my life.
"Mindguards" act as self-appointed
censors to hide problematic information from the group.
Question the safety or efficacy
online and the trolls will come out in force to put you in
your place. They will use any means to discredit views those
that are anti-vax as well as those that are not pro-vax enough.
Illusions of unanimity lead members to
believe that everyone is in agreement and feels the same way.
Pro-vaxxers are quick to claim that
"every doctor endorses vaccines" when there are many doctors
(easily found online) who believe that vaccines are not safe
or effective as popular opinion proclaims.
Direct pressure to conform is often
placed on members who pose questions, and those who question
the group are often seen as disloyal or traitorous.
All of the above actions of pro-vaxxers
combine to pressure those who refuse to vaccinate. Only you
know what is in your best interests: only you can and should
decide to vaccinate your children and yourself.
How is the "Four Dog Defense" popularized
in the tobacco industry show up in the vaccine industry?
It works like this:
1- "First of all, I don't have a dog"
as in "vaccines are good for you!" Vaccines "...are a conspiracy
to do good. The goal is to keep immunization rates up so that dreaded
diseases don't come back." Kevin Conway, Vaccine Injury Lawyer
(from "The Greater Good - Think You Know Everything About
Vaccines... Think Again")
"And if I had a dog, it doesn't bite" as in "A lot of
doctors try to convince their patients that vaccines are 100% safe
[and] that parents have nothing at all to worry about. You dont'
even need to question the system." Dr. Robert Sears (from "The Greater
Good - Think You Know Everything About Vaccines... Think Again")
"And if I had a dog and it did bite, then it didn't bite you"
as in "That you got a vaccine and that you then developed symptoms
doesn't necessarily mean that the vaccine caused the symptoms."
Dr. Paul Offit (from "The Greater Good - Think You Know Everything
About Vaccines... Think Again")
"And if I had a dog and it did bite, and it bit you, then you
provoked the dog" as in YOU "are trading the benefit of a life
long immunity from normal childhood illnesses for a life long
suffering of chronic disease." Robert Mendelsohn MD (from "Silent
Epidemic - The Untold Story of Vaccines") Also, "Subjecting
millions and millions of women [to an anti-cancer vaccine] to
eliminate a few thousand cases of cancer does not really seem
justified to me even if it does eliminate these cancers... even
if it is effective I wouldn't do it." Scott Ratner MD (from
"Silent Epidemic - The Untold Story of Vaccines) After all, if
you took a vaccine voluntarily... then - yes - you "provoked"
the vaccine dog to bite you.
How is the "Fear Appeal" popularized
in advertising show up in the vaccine industry?
It works like this: "A fear appeal is a
persuasive message that attempts to arouse fear in order to
divert behavior through the threat of impending danger or harm.
It presents a risk, presents the vulnerability to the risk,
and then may, or may not suggest a form of protective action."
Vaccines are sold based on the fear of the "return of dread
diseases" and then vaccines are proclaimed as the solution
to their return.
Why even Paul Offit says so!
His words: "I think in many ways that
vaccines are the perfect storm of fear."
How do
"Obstacles to Knowledge"
popularized in philosophy show up in
the vaccine industry?
Idols of the Theater:
This obstacle to knowledge comes from
learning and philosophy that are accepted without question
as fact by the majority of the population.
As Paul Offit says, "I have a problem
with the terms, 'phila' meaning love and 'sophos' meaning wisdom...
Where exactly is the wisdom that it makes more sense to not get
a vaccine than to get one?" I
will answer that: the love is in not giving multiple vaccines to
an infant or a child and risk the
"potentially life-altering dangers
associated with vaccine[s]."
Idols of the Tribe:
This obstacle to knowledge is deceptive
beliefs which are common to the human race.
As Paul Offit says, we "...give vaccines
to prevent 14 different diseases in the first few years of life,
which can mean as many as 26 inoculations during that time, and
as many as five shots at one time, to prevent diseases that most
people don’t see — using biological fluids that most people don’t
understand."
I will answer this: vaccines do not prevent the
diseases they claim to prevent as
these so-called vaccine preventable
diseases keep breaking out in highly vaccinated populations!
Idols of the Marketplace:
This obstacle to knowledge comes from the
very deceptive use of communication.
As Paul Offit says, "If religion teaches us
anything, it is to care about our children, our families and our
communities. A choice to put a child in harm’s way, to allow them
to catch and potentially transmit a fatal infection, is a profoundly
non-religious thing to do — and therefore shouldn't be given the
legal protections of religion."
I will answer this: giving a child a vaccine
that causes them to spread contagion ("shedding") and that is full
of toxic poisons ("adjuvants") is not only contrary to religion
but, in my view, should be prosecuted as a criminal act.
Idols of the Cave:
This obstacle to knowledge arises within the
mind of the individual.
As Paul Offit says, "Vaccines are not a
belief system, they are an evidence-based system. Vaccines stand
on a mountain of evidence — you don’t have to believe in vaccines
any more than you have to believe in gravity or evolution."
I will answer this: That mountain of evidence
is actually a house of cards built on intentionally twisted history
as this page details. Not to worry: reincarnation works whether
you believe in it or not and Paul Offit is destined to be vaxxed
to the max... and he will reap what he has sown.
Why is the phenomenon of "disease die
off" always ignored in the case of vaccinations?
Take the famous case of the firebombing
of Cotton Mather. The note attached to the bomb survived and
read "Mather, you dog, damn you, I'll inoculate you with this."
Mather's ally, Zabdiel Boylston (who was also pro-vaccine),
collected data showing that smallpox died down after there was
an effort to inoculate those in Boston. YET by the time those
inoculations were made, the disease was dying off. Diseases are
like a wave: they start, they peak, and they die off. So was
the reduced death rate due to vaccines or to disease die off?
Here is where pro-vaxers are certain it is always vaccines.
Why have there always been anti-vaccine
protesters from the time of Jenner?
"The anti-vaccination movement has been
around nearly as long as the usage of vaccinations."
"Vaccination acts passed between 1840 and
1853 made vaccination compulsory in Britain, and almost immediately
anti-vaccination leagues challenged the law as a violation of
civil liberty... Anti-vaccination groups have continued into the
21st century and are highly visible on the internet, presenting
arguments remarkably similar to those of the 19th century."
Why is this? Why are other scientific
advances eventually accepted BUT NEVER vaccines? Could it be
that as each generation is damaged by vaccination, people rise up
against it? You decide.
Is there evidence as to the health of
children who are vaccinated versus unvaccinated?
Both sides of the vaccine debate say the
same thing: there needs to be a "vaxxed versus unvaxxed study!"
Vaccination records are kept as are statistics for populations
who chose not to vaccinate for religious reasons like Amish people.
Informal research exists showing that
Amish people who are unvaccinated rarely get autism, cancer,
or heart disease.
Formal research exists showing that
compared to unvaccinated children, vaccinated children had higher
odds of developing: chronic illness (2.4 times higher), eczema
(2.9 times higher), neurodevelopmental disorder (3.7 times higher),
autism (4.2 times higher), adhd (4.2 times higher), learning
disabilities (5.2 times higher), and allergic rhinitis (30.1
times higher). So you decide
which is better vaxxed versus unvaxxed? As always, the choice
is yours!
Why must there be intellectual dishonesty
in the promotion of vaccines?
In the "Annual Summary of Vital Statistics:
Trends in the Health of Americans During the 20th Century" by
Bernard Guyer, Mary Anne Freedman, Donna M. Strombino, and Edward
J Sondik, December 2000 from Pediatrics: Official Journal of the
American Academy of Pediatrics, this sentence used to be included
in the article: "Thus vaccination does not account for the
impressive declines in mortality seen in the first half of the
century." NOW THAT PHRASE HAS BEEN REMOVED. While I have begun
researching links to information that is not pro-vaccine, I
found that several links have simply disappeared over time.
How does herd mentality play a role
in the vaccine industry?
Jerome Groopman in his book, "How Doctors
Think", notes the "culture of conformity and orthodoxy that
begins in medical school" (p. 153).
Dr. Russell Blaylock expands on this:
"Even if they are not fans of vaccines, many doctors give vaccines
out of fear. They do not want to question authority or challenge
professional organizations and licensing bodies, such as state
medical boards, the very organizations that develop and enforce
vaccines mandates. From the very beginning of medical education,
bright, aspiring medical students, interns and residents are
taught to do as they are told, follow orders and not confront the
status quo. Doctors-in-training who challenge the system or dare
to think independently are often punished with more work or
publicly humiliated in front of their peers. Early on, they get
the message they better tow the Party Line if they want to survive.
Later, when in their individual practices, doctors who buck the
system and don't vaccinate, or vaccinate less aggressively, often
suffer penalties such as losing hospital privileges, being dropped
from insurance company rosters or being ostracized by their peers."
It is this conformity, orthodoxy, and
social pressure that creates a herd mentality among doctors. This,
in the past, has lead to the following horrific medical failures.
The same herd mentality that is still at work with vaccines.
SMOKING:
Tobacco was introduced into England by
Sir John Hawkins in 1565.
In 1604, King James I of England wrote
"A Counterblaste to Tobacco" where he said that smoking was a
"custom loathsome to the eye, hatefull to the Nose, harmefull
to the braine, dangerous to the Lungs..."
Flash forward to the 20th century
where doctor endorsed cigarettes touting
their health benefits
right up until
The Federal Cigarette Labeling and
Advertising Act of 1965 (Public Law 89–92) required that the
warning 'Caution: Cigarette Smoking May Be Hazardous to Your
Health' be placed in small print on one of the side panels of
each cigarette package."
CALOMEL (MERCURY):
This account by President John Adams is
the best way to understand WHY Mercury was so horrifying as a
medical treatment: "in the Winter of 1764, the Small Pox
prevailing in Boston, I... was inocculated under the Direction
of Dr. Nathaniel Perkins and Dr. Joseph Warren. This Distemper
was very terrible even by Inocculation at that time. My Physicians
dreaded it, and prepared me, by a milk Diet and a Course of
Mercurial Preparations, till they reduced me very low before
they performed the operation. They continued to feed me with
Milk and Mercury through the whole Course of it, and salivated
me to such a degree, that every tooth in my head became
so loose that I believe I could have pulled them all with my
Thumb and finger. By such means they conquered the Small Pox,
which I had very lightly, but they rendered me incapable... of
speaking or eating in my old Age."
Think mercury in vaccines is
at all safe, even in very small doses?
PATENT MEDICINE:
"The era of patent medicine — which
stretched from the 17th into the 20th century and was especially
prolific in the United States and England — was a response to
the shortcomings of medicine at the time, which often relied
on questionable treatments like bloodletting and purging."
Yet doctors approved of such patent "medicines" as opium, blood,
cocaine, cannabis, and arsenic.
Human blood is still present in vaccines.
RADIATION:
"Early in the 20th century there was a
medical practice that revolved around a new treatment involving
the radioactive material called radium... By the 1940s and 50s,
however, the practice of using radium as a medical treatment
had been reduced to very few applications due to its high price,
small quantity, and the dangers of handling radium...
like disease, disfigurement, and death.
THALIDOMIDE:
"Dr. Frances Oldham Kelsey... asked the
manufacturer (of Thalidomide), the William S. Merrell Company of
Cincinnati, for more (information about Thalidomide)... by late
1961, the terrible evidence was pouring in. The drug — better
known by its generic name, thalidomide — was causing thousands
of babies in Europe, Britain, Canada and the Middle East to be
born with flipper-like arms and legs and other defects.
DDT (Dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane):
"DDT Is Good For Me-e-e!" was the
advertizing slogan which many people believed, including
physicians.
"In the 1940s and ’50s dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane, a synthetic
pesticide better known as DDT, was used to kill bugs that spread
malaria and typhus in several parts of the world. DDT was argued
to be toxic to humans and the environment in the famous environmental
[work], 'Silent Spring'. It was banned by the U.S. government in
1972."
When DDT usage increased, cases of polio
increased... and when it usage decreased, cases of polio decreased.
click here to see the graph.
What is vaccine fanaticism?
At first, I did not believe that there was
such a thing as "vaccine fanaticism" but I encountered it so many
times why preparing these pages, that I include it here as a form
of vaccine propaganda.
Vaccine Fanaticism... is characterized by
an unwavering devotion to vaccines without any thought to the very
real risks and dangers caused by vaccines. Vaccine fanatics deny
that any risks exist and declare that those who even question the
efficacy and safety of vaccines are the dangerous ones to society.
Many vaccine fanatics believe that those who question or oppose
vaccines should be punished, even to the extent of rounding them
up and jailing them. Their solution is to forcefully vaccinate
children against the wishes of the parents, all in the name of
the 'greater good of society'. Despite what the American Medical
Association has said in its own ethical code about mandatory
vaccines, vaccine fanatics believe that forcing vaccines on others
is the only solution. The AMA is very clear about patients having
the right to determine their own course of treatments. Their ethical
code clearly states "Informed consent is a basic policy in both
ethics and law that physicians must honor." Despite the fact
that the AMA is against forcing vaccines and treatments upon
patients, vaccine fanatics believe that no one has the right to
make that decision for themselves and for their child; they believe
that everyone should be vaccinated, by force if necessary. In their
efforts to force their beliefs on those around them, vaccine
fanatics will go to great lengths to try to convince others, and
to demonize anyone who doesn’t share their point of view. This
kind of zealous ideal used to be reserved for matters of religion.
Credits: Various as noted
KEYS:
HOME
Site MAP
Mega Index
Ezine Index
Past Life
Higher Self
All About Us
F-R-E-E:
F-R-E-E
F-R-E-E
F-R-E-E
SERVICES:
Phone
Recorded
Email
Remote
Past Life
Soulmate
Service
BOOKS:
Cure Diabetes
Cure Stress
Cure Depression
Lose Weight
ChakraEnergy
Secrets of
Create Luck
eBook Affiliate
TOOLS:
Our Healing
Our Order
Karma-Brain
CONTACT:
Contact Us
Email Us
Instant Info
GuestBook
Thanks for...
Web Site Hosted by
by