You are wrong if you think vaccine science is settled.
If you think the experts know whats going on in our bodies when a vaccine is injected, I have news for you.
“The science is settled”. "The science has been done". “Vaccines are safe and effective”, “There is nothing more to talk about”. This dogma is everywhere. These statements are designed to stop all discussion. They are not true!
Many times I have heard "Ya gotta look at the science man" in response to a remark on vaccine. I then ask, "so how many hours have you looked?" I get silence- zero hours, they are quoting dogma heard over and over.
If you find yourself saying the above comments, you have been “got to”. That is the narrative being pushed by Industry and mainstream media.
The statement, "the science is settled", is anti-science.
Have you ever heard of science being settled on anything medical, or anything for that matter? . The Industry and CDC do not want you looking into it. “You must get all your vaccines”.
The Science is Settled, nothing more to discuss, and Industry Funded Science.
-The people questioning vaccines are the one's who have actually looked at the science, or have a vaccine injured kid.
-The first 5 links on the Home Page of this site showed how little good science there is behind vaccines. I show more below.
#24.http://vancouversun.com/news/local-news/how-do-vaccines-work-ubc-scientists-aim-to-find-out This article discusses “how scientists around the world are now going to figure out how vaccines really work.”. Says that in 2017 we still only have basic understanding of how vaccines work. Quote: “Vaccines are very difficult thing to study because there are reactions taking place all over the body” then says “most of what happens is a ‘black box’.” So how can we say the “science is settled? I will repeat that, “Most of what happens is a black box”. We have no idea what long term damage is being done by vaccines.
If you think the science is settled on vaccines, read this direct from the CDC itself. Also shows how poor the science behind vaccines is.
#25. https://www.cdc.gov/vaccinesafety/ensuringsafety/history/index.html This web page has the usual dogma, but does say one important thing. This here is cut and pasted from this CDC web page:
"The NCVIA established a committee from the Institute of Medicine (IOM) to review the literature on vaccine reactions. This group concluded that there are limitations in our knowledge of the risks associated with vaccines. The group looked at 76 health problems to see if they were caused by vaccines. Of those, 50 (66%) had no or inadequate research to form a conclusion. Specifically, the IOM identified the following problems:
Limited understanding of biological processes that underlie adverse events.
Incomplete and inconsistent information from individual reports.
Poorly constructed research studies (not enough people enrolled).
Inadequate systems to track vaccine side effects.
Few experimental studies were published in the medical literature".
The above is saying there is fifty health problems that they do not know if vaccines are causing them or not!! And there is no or inadequate research to form a conclusion!!! This is 2018, when is the research going to be done? Is the answer they won't because the industry does not want to know or they already suspect the truth.(I thought the science was in and settled, guess not.)
It is also not being being done because there is no money in it and if you do it, you are labeled a anti-vaxer, and a smear campaign is initiated by pharma. There is some research being done though, and their findings are disturbing, see Tab J and the appendix.
For the full IOM report see here:
You can buy IOM report or read it for free at this link. 2012 IOM(released 2011) report on vaccine safety done for the CDC.
#25a. http://nationalacademies.org/HMD/Reports/2011/Adverse-Effects-of-Vaccines-Evidence-and-Causality.aspx Goto box on right and can read a free copy on-line.
Read Appendix D of the report, is an eye-opener and shows how little good science there is on vaccines. The opposite of what you hear in the media all the time.
In-spite of all this, I believe this report is biased, when you read the introduction and conclusions, you can see they are still sticking with the CDC mantra of "careful what you say about vaccines, protect the vaccination program at all costs". Don't scare the public.
#25b.-http://www.sciencemag.org/news/2017/09/why-flu-vaccines-so-often-fail Says most scientists can’t replicate studies by their peers. Article says over 70% of studies could not be replicated. Apparently part of the problem is “what you see in published literature is a highly curated version of what really happened”. Journals are going for flash instead of substance.
#26.http://www.nytimes.com/2013/11/26/health/study-finds-vaccinated-baboons-can-still-carry-whooping-cough.html?_r=0 Lets look at the DTP vaccine. They changed the DTP to the DTaP in in the 1990’s because of side effects.( That should read too many serious side effects. The vaccine was causing more problems than the disease). The new DTaP has less side effects but works poorly, and starts wearing off after 5 years.
The pertussis virus is changing and the vaccine is not really working any more, also the science is now showing that the vaccinated can spread pertussus to the unvaccinated. They say we need a new vaccine but nobody is working on it. Pharma won't bother, because it is now mandatory for everyone to get it. They have no incentive to do it. So it will take government or CDC action to get this going. What are they waiting for?? See the DTaP section at Tab O for all the science.
The pertussis vaccine should be separated out on its own I believe, so the kid can get the diphtheria vaccine and tetanus a few year later, we need to minimize the number of vaccines a kid under two years old gets.
-This Health Canada link shows that it is pharma or the manufacture that does the safety testing of our vaccines.(Read 1st paragraph) This is the same people who have been fined over and over for fudging studies, hiding negative data, under estimating adverse events.
-http://centerforvaccinology.ca/vaccine-safety/ This shows how vaccines are approved. Says they do a thorough review of all data before vaccine is sold. Note that all this data comes from pharma, so of pharma decides to manipulate the data or hide bad data, they would never know.
#28.https://www.fda.gov/biologicsbloodvaccines/scienceresearch/biologicsresearchareas/ucm127315.htm Read this recent article from the FDA. Quote: “The present lack of knowledge in areas of mumps vaccine safety and efficacy is highlighted by the licensure of some mumps vaccines that have caused Aseptic Meningitis”. Quote: “Problems with vaccine safety can be linked to an inadequate understanding of the infectious process”. Article says over and over how little they understand of how the live virus vaccine like mumps in the MMR works. This is 2017!!
The current mumps vaccine barely works, we are now getting many mumps outbreaks in the fully vaccinated. The article also says “new live mumps vaccines are coming and they do not know how to test if there safe and effective”. Does this sound like vaccine science is settled? It's also scary.
#29.https://www.bu.edu/sph/2017/09/21/resurgence-of-whooping-cough-may-owe-to-vaccines-inability-to-prevent-infections/ This also shows we have never really understood how the DTP vaccine works. Quote: “This disease is back(pertussis) because we didn’t really understand how our immune defences against whooping cough worked, and did not understand how the vaccines needed to work to prevent it,” said associate professor of global health and lead author of the article. “Instead we layered assumptions upon assumptions, and now find ourselves in the uncomfortable position of admitting that we may made some crucial errors.” Does this sound like we know what we are doing with vaccines??
This also says "Experimental and immunologic data has shown that aP(DTaP) vaccines do not provide herd immunity, while mathematical models imply otherwise." So why is this vaccine mandatory, it only protects the user, not others.
(More on this in the DTaP vaccine at drop down Tab O).
#29a.https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29883854 This 2018 study shows how poorly our system responds to something that needs changing. This suggests vaccine doses should be adjusted for women as they get more antibodies and a stronger immune response and more adverse events. (They have know this for a long time, but done nothing about it!!)
All the above shows we are correct to be cautious with vaccines, and shows how poor the science is.
-Epidemiological studies are the lowest from of science.
CDC and most other scientists are only doing epidemiological studies not biological animal studies that are showing all the problems. This is handicapping vaccine safety science. It is also almost impossible to get funding now to do vaccine safety studies.(The power of the industry) And if you do, you get 'Wakefielded'.(link 15 TAB A)
-There is currently almost 200 clinical trials going on for new vaccines.
-http://www.immunizeforgood.com/vaccines/new-vaccines-on-the-horizon This is like giving a kid a hammer and everything becomes a nail. If we take all these vaccines, our bodies are going to be in a constant state of inflammation and over drive, and filled with toxins and adjuvants. Do we want a vaccine for every bug on the planet? Some vaccines are now causing the pathogens to mutate to more dangerous forms(Tab N Links 94, 94a). We can't remove all risk from living, for some of the new vaccines, the vaccine is more dangerous than the disease. Is it time to say enough!
Until we get the CDC and others admitting there is some serious issues with vaccines they will never fix them.
CAN WE TRUST "INDUSTRY FUNDED" SCIENCE?
The short answer is no.
Before I read a study I always try to see who funded it. If it’s not listed at bottom of study, it can be very hard to find out for the average person. Industry is getting more adept at hiding funding sources.
If a study is paid by "Industry" it is biased, period, it's just a question of how much. Most science is Industry funded. The FDA and ACIP all rely on pharma for studies to see if drugs and vaccines are safe and effective, they seldom do their own studies and if they do it is years after approval.
That's why we have disasters like Vioxx. When pharma is caught cheating, they get a fine, and carry on as normal.
I could find a 100 links about this problem without even trying, there is so much written about it. It is a serious problem.
READ THIS AMAZING LINK.
#51.http://www.nogracias.eu/wp-content/uploads/2014/01/deben-las-revistas-dejar-de-publicar-articulos-de-la-industria-bmj.pdf This from the BMJ Say’s “studies funded by drug companies are even less reliable than tobacco studies were, and suggest they should not even be published”. Says, “two thirds of clinical trials are done by pharma”.
Second paragraph says “prescription drugs are now the 3rd leading cause of death”. It is these same companies that have made all the new vaccines that have come out since 1986, it is their biased data that is presented to ACIP so they can decide if they should recommend a vaccine or not.
#52.https://www.drugwatch.com/manufacturer/clinical-trials-and-hidden-data/ "Funding bias". "How pharma influences drug trial results" Lots here, good article.
I love this article, hilarious, and proves my point.
#53.https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-research-beverages-diabetes/industry-funded-studies-dont-find-sweet-drinks-linked-to-obesity-diabetes-idUSKBN12V2J1 Says 26 out of 26 studies found no link between sugar and obesity, these were all Industry funded. Another 34 studies did find a link between sugar and obesity and 33 out of the 34 were "not" industry funded. The question is, which ones should you believe? The point of this is to show that all industry studies are suspect.
Yet the FDA and CDC and their ACIP accept the data presented to them on new drugs and vaccines with little over-site. It’s like they have never seen any of these articles on pharma corruption. Which is why we have disasters like Vioxx, Fen-Phen, Bextra, Avandia to name a few. Vioxx alone killed 10,000 to 80,000 people depending on who you believe.
-https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3954632/ Good article explaining how industry funded studies are 4 times more likely to report a positive outcome on their product than independent research, and much more here.
-This2327 article by Dr John Loannidis asks "Why Most Published Research Findings Are False".
-https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20388211 "reporting bias included the overestimation of efficacy and the underestimation of safety risks." (I believe this is routine practice.)
-This link shows Novartis operations being suspended for hiding adverse events for a number of it's drugs. And last sentence says they were also manipulating clinical trial data, 2015.
-This link shows Novartis was again caught manipulating data, this is 2019.
This4866 shows the FDA inspects clinical trials and found many had fabricated data. and also says none of the peer reviewed journals mentioned that the FDA had found a problem.
-This shows Novartis "Novartis employee fired for complaining about incorrect data".
-This shows Sanofi "to pay nearly $12 million for illegally using a charity to pay kickbacks to Medicare patients.
-This show "Sanofi US Agrees to Pay $109 Million to Resolve False Claims Act Allegations of Free Product Kickbacks to Physicians".
-When I don't trust science, I resort to common sense and logic. For example: When a doctor says I must get the polio vaccine on schedule, my common sense says, "Now that vaccines have got rid of polio, I know I am ok to delay giving this to my infant for two years. And I know the Polio Eradication program says there are only 3 countries with polio now and the few cases there are under control. I know that there is no risk of polio, but there is small risk from the vaccine Note, I said "delay, not skip".
Google “Peer review process broken”. Someone who says he wants peer reviewed studies, does not realize that process is not trustworthy. Also says there are more retraction of studies now than published ones.
-People say you should only look at Peer reviewed studies, but does it mean anything? The "Peer Review process" is broken and not working as it should, and often meaningless. You can find many articles on this, here is one.
#54b.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arnold_S._Relman Former editor of the BMJ Says “The academic institutions of this country are allowing themselves to be the paid agents of the pharmaceutical industry. I think its disgraceful.”
-#54c. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4572812/ Editor of the BMJ Marcia Angell says "It is simply no longer possible to believe much of the clinical research that is published, or to rely on the judgment of trusted physicians or authoritative medical guidelines. I take no pleasure in this conclusion, which I reached slowly and reluctantly over my two decades as editor of The New England Journal of Medicine”
And 2nd paragraph has editor of the Lancet saying the same.
#55. http://journals.plos.org/plosmedicine/article?id=10.1371/journal.pmed.0020124 Says most published research findings are false, due to bias and other reasons. Next link makes you think this is true.
#55a.-https://www.bmj.com/content/359/bmj.j4619 Shows editors of high impact journals and others receive industry payments, conflict of interest?.
#55b.https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamainternalmedicine/fullarticle/2712563?guestAccessKey=0a69688c-1460-4f16-9415-a5cedc82b8d2&utm_source=silverchair&utm_campaign=jama_network&utm_content=weekly_highlights&cmp=1&utm_medium=email In this new systematic review of 9 unique studies of 479 unique patients with heart failure, an overall paucity of robust high-quality evidence was available to support or refute the use of reduced dietary salt intake.LOL so much for science. This is not about vaccines, but shows again, there is no good science being done, you cant trust any of it. All science is tainted by industry and agenda's.
See this article from CBS News, Shows Merck had a "hit list" on doctors who criticized their product. And this one as well. Merck also created a fake medical journal to put its studies on Vioxx and got Ghostwriters to write favorable articles on Vioxx. These people make your vaccines.
-This 2019 article shows vaccines are now driving Mercks enormous profits, mainly HPV, and measles is doing well to. ******
-Here is another example of how Industry tracks people who are opposed to their products.
-This 2019 article from the Guardian shows how industry sets out destroy anyone who gets in their way.
-This recent article describes more Misdeeds by Merck and then how the courts routinely help Industry hide negative data about their products. Or here. This article show more on how Judges hide bad pharma data from us, this one on opioids. Says they have hid data on about half of 115 bad product cases over last 20 years, so public does not know of dangers.
There is now a congressional hearing into this problem of Judges hiding bad data.
#56. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6nAJI2EYL-8 This is a great video on a mother addressing the Washington state Board of Health. One quote: “We have discovered a network of government and drug industry entanglement so complex and so richly funded, they form a pervasive tightly woven fabric consisting literally of hundreds of groups all working together towards just one thing: increasing vaccination uptake.”
Goes on about how good science is ignored by our Health boards.
-This study shows how bad things are now, Industry influences every step of the regulatory process. All Industry studies are suspect, Meta analysis's are no longer trustworthy.
This next link shows we cannot trust the WHO. It often has conflicts of interest to get funding.
-http://www.cnn.com/2017/09/25/opinions/single-payer-failure-opinion-atlas/index.html I had to put this link here. This shows what the media is capable of when they have the "industry" agenda to push. Canadians will be able to see better the amazing fake news that this story is. This story does not mention a single good thing about the Single payer health care system that Canada and the UK use. And amplifies our few downsides 10 fold, to give Americans a 100% inaccurate picture of a good health care system.
Science journals and medicine completely corrupted by pharma. Studies that are not favourable are not printed in journals. Also journal editors are paid large sums of money by pharma. Pharma also buys large numbers of the journals when one of their favourable studies are printed which brings in large sums to the journal. (Read some of the links in this article) This also shows Science journals owned by pharma
-Good video on how pharma controls the media.
-This shows new poll rates phama at the bottom in how people regard industry and the Federal government and the Health care system at bottom as well. (yet you trust all the new vaccines, go figure?)
More on Falsified clinical trials.
-This says Pharma owns congress and gives many examples of how much money senators get from pharma.
-This study from JAMA says "Clinical trials under the purview of the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) have been shown to report falsified data".
This says when they find falsified data, the journals are seldom corrected, the bad data stays out there. This is a write up of the above studies, says Meta analysis's often include the bad data and that completely change the outcome of the meta analysis, gives and example.
This says "Almost half of all meta-analyses had conclusions altered by publications containing falsified data".
-This article from BMJ by Joel Lexchin and Donald Light shows how bad the drug industry is and says only 1 in 10 new drugs actually do anything for the patient. So why would we think the new vaccines are any more useful?
-This 2020 article from CTV news is a good trashing of pharma in Canada. Also says "out of 600 corporately sponsored phase 4 clinical trials worldwide, None published any adverse data or effects." Also says "Health Canada puts three to four times as many resources into approving new drugs than it does into monitoring the safety of drugs already being prescribed." Says "Drug companies routinely pay doctors to put their names on scientific papers written by the company." So you dont know it is a "Industry" paper.
-This article from Global news is in 4 parts, is about our doctors and pharma corruption and how much money pharma gives to doctors. This CBC news story about doctors taking money, and good links here about how bribes change prescribing habits etc.
-This is a good article on the AMA and how the "system went after alternative treatment in favour of drugs. And why our doctors think anything alternative is bad.
-This 2020 study by Harvard says "The FDA has increasingly accepted less data and more surrogate measures, and has shortened its review times", this over the last 20 years.
Also says "The FDA funding needed to implement and manage these programs has been addressed by expanding industry-paid user fees", and says "in 2018, user fees accounted for approximately 80% of the salaries of review personnel responsible for the approval of new drugs". Looks like pharma is in charge.
This shows Google is now working for Pharma.