Investigation Chief: Swine Flu Pandemic Was A Hoax

February 5, 2010

Paul Joseph Watson
Prison Planet.com
Thursday, February 4, 2010

Investigation Chief: Swine Flu Pandemic Was A Hoax 040210top2

Appearing on The Alex Jones Show, outgoing Chair of the Council of Europe’s Sub-committee on Health Wolfgang Wodarg said that his panel’s investigation into the 2009 swine flu outbreak has found that the pandemic was a fake hoax manufactured by pharmaceutical companies in league with the WHO to make vast profits while endangering public health.

The Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe, a 47 nation body encompassing democratically elected members of parliament, began hearings last month to investigate whether the H1N1 swine flu pandemic was falsified or exaggerated in an attempt to profit from vaccine sales.

Wodarg said that governments were “threatened” by special interest groups within the pharmaceutical industry as well as the WHO to buy the vaccines and inject their populations without any reasonable scientific reason for doing so, and yet in countries like Germany and France only around 6 per cent took the vaccine despite enough being available to cover 90 per cent of the population.

Wodarg said he was alarmed when the WHO cited early cases in Mexico as a threat and quickly moved to pandemic status, despite the fact that the cases were relatively mild and the virus was not new.

“This was the mildest flu ever and the people were much more clever than the government so we have to find out what was going on with WHO – why did they do this pandemic alarm,” asked Wodarg, noting that pharmaceutical interests within the World Health Organization were instrumental in creating the panic and reaping the financial dividends.

“We don’t know what really happened, we only know that they changed the definition of a pandemic, which was a very dangerous thing before and now is just a normal flu, and this is why business for pharmaceutical companies was open,” said Wodarg, adding that select pharmaceutical companies were handed a monopoly on creating the vaccine.

“It is their trick that they always try to monopolize this and we pay much more like this,” said Wodarg, noting that if patents were left open, vaccines would be produced much quicker and far cheaper.

Wodarg said there was “no other explanation” for what happened than the fact that the WHO worked in cahoots with the pharmaceutical industry to manufacture the panic in order to generate vast profits, agreeing with host Alex Jones that the entire farce was a hoax.

He also explained how health authorities were “already waiting for something to happen” before the pandemic started and then exploited the virus for their own purposes.

Wodarg said that the investigation was likely to recommend an end to the undue influence of pharmaceutical companies on public health institutions in Europe.

However, Wodarg pointed out, “There is no law for WHO, there is no one who punishes those people in WHO, we only have national law, so this is very important that we collect the information and on the national level we try to find those people responsible and we try to punish them.”

“Have investigations, have a deep look, we cannot tolerate such a development, we cannot have this next winter again, we don’t want such fake pandemics,” concluded Wodarg.

Wodarg said that vast quantities of unused vaccines were now being dumped on the third world and that other countries were simply trying to push ahead with vaccination programs even though the virus has proven not to be a major threat.

“The Japanese bought vaccines for 110 million people and they cannot return from this vaccine contract so they are in a very big political dilemma now and they already have problems because the Japanese people already know it wouldn’t be necessary to get vaccinated,” Wodarg told The Alex Jones Show.

Watch the interview with Wodarg below.

Advertisements

Journalist calls for euthanasia of disabled newborns

February 5, 2010

Russia Today
Wednesday, February 3, 2010

The article titled “Finish it off so it doesn’t suffer,” which calls for the euthanasia of disabled newborn children, has caused public outrage in Russia and has led to fierce debates in the blogging community.

In the article under question, the author says that “the killing of the newborn is in fact the same as an abortion or super-late term abortion” and calls disabled newborns “defective blanks” and “newborn idiots”. He states that depriving disabled infants of life is “true humanism”.

The Union of Russian Journalists has accused the author of the article of breaching professional ethics.

The Union Board’s criticism comes from the fact that, instead of discussing the right for free choice of a disabled newborns’ fate, the author claims the only rational way is to deprive them of life. The board concluded that the article entrenches upon extremism.

The board added that the author of the article should have realized that he is humiliating people who are already bringing up disabled kids.

“The author is not raising a disabled child – that is why his generalized conclusions about the life of disabled people and their families… are just speculations. As a mother of a disabled child, and based on my experience, I state that these speculations have nothing to do with the reality,” said Svetlana Shtarkova, who, along with another disabled child’s mother, Snezhana Mitina, has written a letter to the Union of Russian Journalists’ Board.

According to statistics, there are 545,000 disabled kids in Russia. Only 12.2% of them live in foster homes, 23.6% of these children have various organ diseases and/or metabolic disorders, 23.1% have motor disabilities, and 21.3% have mental disabilities.

Canadians Contract Guillain-Barre Syndrome After Swine Flu Shot In Same Doctor’s Office

February 5, 2010

Paralyzing nerve disease just a coincidence according to health officials

Steve Watson & Paul Watson
Infowars.net
February 2, 2010

Canadians Contract Guillain Barre Syndrome After Swine Flu Shot In  Same Doctors Office 010210featureTwo residents of Markham in Ontario, Canada have been diagnosed with the debilitating nerve disease Guillain-Barre Syndrome, after both taking the H1N1 flu shot in the same doctor’s office just two days apart.

The Toronto Sun reports that Donna Hartlen, a 39-year-old mother is unable to walk or chew solid food properly.

Hartlen has no history of illness and was perfectly health until the 29th December when she collapsed and was rushed to hospital.

Hartlen is adamant that the illness stems from a H1N1 shot she received two weeks before her symptoms suddenly appeared.

She became even more convinced this was the case when she encountered Don Gibson in the room next door, who received the same shot just two days before her, from the same GP. He too has been diagnosed with GBS.

“It’s way too coincidental,” insists the slight mom, her words slurred because the right side of her face will not move. “It’s either a bad batch or a lot more people are getting this than they are talking about.”

Her 80-year-old neighbour is equally convinced that the H1N1 vaccine to blame. “It must have been a bad batch,” Gibson believes. “But nobody is saying anything. I know I signed a piece of paper and there’s no liability but it’s pretty scary.”

Despite GBS’s clear historical link with the swine flu shot after more got ill from the vaccine than got swine flu during the 1976 mass vaccination program, allied with the fact that health officials last year warned neurologists that they needed to look out for increases in cases of the brain disorder following the launch of the immunization program, doctors and health officials are keeping quiet on the issue.

“Not a single doctor we’ve talked with will even remotely discuss that it’s the H1N1 shot,” Hartlen tells the Toronto Star. “They almost pretend they don’t hear you. They don’t want to alarm the public and they don’t want you to stir up trouble.”

The public health agency in Canada says they haven’t seen any unusual spike in GBS.

Hartlen is seeking government support to help care for her two young children while she suffers from the nerve disorder, however she has hit a wall of silence:

“They’re the ones who push this vaccine. They promote it every five minutes on TV. So I do what they say and I get GBS and they’re not going to help me?” Hartlen said.

“It’s a horror story of how little Ontario will do to help patients that come down with this after the government promotes it so much,” added her husband, Wayne Burke.

Similar cases of GBS, as well as other neurological disorders have been reported following the H1N1 shots in the U.S., Britain and France.

Last November, a high school athlete from Virginia was diagnosed with GBS hours after receiving a swine flu shot, but health authorities dismissed the connection as a coincidence, precisely as they resolved to do long before the H1N1 vaccination program even started.

Efforts on behalf of health authorities to claim that debilitating side-effects and nerve disorders such as GBS have no connection to the vaccine, despite the fact that they are clearly listed on vaccine inserts as potential dangers, is unsurprising considering this is precisely what officials resolved to do before the swine flu mass vaccination program began.

Back In September, Reuters reported on how public health officials were expecting “an avalanche of so-called adverse event reports, which are reports of death, illness or other health trauma,” in the two weeks after people receive the vaccine.

Authorities therefore resolved to dismiss any connection to the swine flu shots a host of heart attacks, strokes and miscarriages that “will be blamed on the H1N1 vaccine,” effectively performing a blanket diagnosis months in advance.

In November, the U.S. government appointed what the media ludicrously billed as an “independent” group of health advisors who were tasked with whitewashing adverse reactions to the swine flu vaccine and ‘explaining’ them to the public as mere coincidence.

The group is headed up by none other than Dr. Marie McCormick of the Harvard School of Public Health. McCormick and her affiliated organizations have routinely issued reports over the past 10 years supporting the government’s position on the link between vaccines and autism, dismissing a correlation entirely despite overwhelming evidence that contradicts this notion. McCormick has been widely criticized by other health experts for her dogged denial of the link between vaccines and autism.

Pharmaceutical companies can be assured that they won’t face reprisals for injuries and deaths that will inevitably occur as a result of exposing millions to mercury and squalene additives that are contained in the H1N1 shot during a mass vaccination program, because the government has already acted to provide them with blanket immunity from lawsuits.

“Vaccine makers and federal officials will be immune from lawsuits that result from any new swine flu vaccine, under a document signed by Secretary of Health and Human Services Kathleen Sebelius,” reported the Associated Press last summer.

Lancet Retracts Study Tying Child Vaccine to Autism

February 5, 2010

Michelle Fay Cortez
Bloomberg
February 2, 2010

The Lancet medical journal retracted a 1998 study that linked a routine childhood vaccine to autism and bowel disease after a U.K. investigation found flaws in the research.

The U.K. General Medical Council, which licenses doctors, concluded in a report last week that three researchers led by Andrew Wakefield at the Royal Free Hospital in London carried out invasive, unnecessary tests, failed to act in the best interest of the children, and misused public funds. It also said Wakefield didn’t disclose a conflict of interest as he was involved in legal claims against the vaccine makers.

“It has become clear that several elements of the 1998 paper by Wakefield et al are incorrect, contrary to the findings of an earlier investigation,” the editors of the Lancet wrote in a statement today.

Immunization rates plunged in the U.K. to less than 80 percent by 2003, as parents concerned about the possible health risks refused the vaccine, according to the Health Protection Agency. Ten of the 12 authors, in a 2004 article in the Lancet, backed away from the suggestion that autism and bowel disease were linked to the vaccine. A panel of U.S. government advisers found the same year that childhood vaccinations probably don’t raise the risk of autism.

The original study, involving 11 boys and one girl aged 10 and under, found bowel disease and developmental disorders in the previously normal children. The parents reported symptoms in eight of the children after they were vaccinated for measles, mumps and rubella.

‘Outrageous’

“It was outrageous,” Jeffrey Boscamp, a pediatrician at Hackensack University Medical Center in New Jersey, said by email. “Most of the authors asked for their names to be removed from the study. It’s unfortunate that it undermined confidence in vaccines when in fact it wasn’t true at all.”

With today’s action by the Lancet, the paper was retracted from the published record, stripping it of its scientific claims.

Wakefield oversees the research program at Thoughtful House, a treatment center for children with developmental disorders, in Austin, Texas.

“The allegations against me and against my colleagues are both unfounded and unjust, and I invite anyone to examine the contents of these proceedings and come to their own conclusion,” Wakefield said in a statement provided by Thoughtful House today.

Telegraph: Was swine flu ever a real threat?

February 5, 2010

Mark Honigsbaum
London Telegraph
February 2, 2010

It’s been a good week for drug companies and an even better one for conspiracy theorists. Last Tuesday, angered by the bumper rise in profits being reported by vaccine manufacturers as the incidence of swine flu plummets, the former head of health at the Council for Europe accused the World Health Organization of “faking” the pandemic.

“It looks like the WHO is under the influence of industry,” Dr Wolfgang Wodarg told a hearing in Strasbourg. “It was stated in panic-stricken terms that this was a flu that could threaten humanity. This is why billions of medications were bought.”

Exhibit number one, says Dr Wodarg, is the WHO’s decision to soften its definition of a pandemic last April, shortly before the emergence of the H1N1 virus. By eliminating the requirement that influenza pandemics should cause “enormous morbidity and death”, the WHO provoked an unnecessary “scare” that conveniently triggered the activation of “sleeping” contracts with vaccine manufacturers. Yet since the WHO’s declaration of a pandemic in June, swine flu has caused just 14,000 deaths worldwide – a fraction of the number who die from seasonal flu every year. This month, the Department of Health reported that cases had fallen to such a low rate that it was cancelling its weekly press briefings.

Like all conspiracy theorists, Wodarg started with the question “Cui bono?” and served up a plausible bad guy. For its part, the WHO vigorously denies the allegations and says Wodarg is “trivialising” what for millions of people has been a very serious problem.

So who is right? Was swine flu ever a genuine pandemic threat, or was it all a lot of (very expensive) fuss about nothing? And what are the lessons for the future? When, in late March, residents of La Gloria, in Mexico, began complaining of peculiar fevers, aches and sore throats, no one took much notice at first. The Mexican government, like the WHO, was focused on a different threat: bird flu. Following the re-emergence of the H5N1 avian virus in 2005, the WHO had drawn up a comprehensive pandemic plan, complete with a phased alert system, to be activated in the event that the virus, which had a mortality rate as high as 60 per cent, began spreading widely in human populations.

“The concern was that if bird flu suddenly went pandemic, it could trigger mortality on a massive scale,” explains John Oxford, professor of virology at Barts and The London Hospital. “The last thing anyone was expecting at that point was a pig virus from Mexico.”

It seems odd to recall now, but the massive stockpiles of Tamiflu which have come in for so much criticism were originally purchased for bird flu. Indeed, it wasn’t until two Californian children developed flu-like illnesses in mid-April that officials at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) in Atlanta realised that a new swine flu virus was on the loose.

Scientists quickly began joining the dots, and when the CDC confirmed that the H1N1 subtype from the Californian cases was identical to a virus isolated from a five-year-old boy in the La Gloria outbreak, it automatically triggered a “phase five” alert.

At around the same time, the WHO published those new guidance notes, deleting the requirement that pandemic strains should cause “enormous morbidity and death”. This was part of an ongoing review of how it should define a pandemic. Henceforth, all that would be required was “sustained” transmission in at least two different parts of the world at the same time. The result was that on June 11, when it became clear that swine flu had spread to more than 70 countries, the WHO had no option but to declare a pandemic.

But Wendy Barclay, professor of virology at Imperial College London, who was present at many of the meetings where the change of definition was discussed, says it is a “nonsense” to make out, as Wodarg does, that it was a conspiracy. “The timing was coincidental,” she says. “The WHO was considering the change long before swine flu.” And in view of the initial reports from Mexico, which suggested unusual mortality patterns among young adults, she believes the WHO was right to call for the fast-track manufacture of vaccines. “The drug companies should be applauded for delivering the vaccines in record time,” she says.

Peter Openshaw, the director of the Centre for Respiratory Infection at Imperial College London, agrees with that verdict, pointing out that the fear at the time was that swine flu could prove as deadly as the 1918 “Spanish” influenza, another strain of H1N1 that killed an estimated 50 million people worldwide. Although he has reservations about the definition change, saying that pandemics should also be required to meet a “severity threshold”, he argues that “on balance it would have been irresponsible not to have taken the measures we did”.

Having said that, Prof Openshaw admits there are some things that should be done better next time. The Department of Health’s prediction in July that as many as 65,000 Britons could die over the winter was wrong, because scientists did not have accurate data. Initial reports suggested the virus was less widespread than it was, artificially elevating the death rate. However, a study just published in The Lancet, based on more extensive tests conducted over the summer, shows that, at that time, as many as one in three people in Britain were carrying the virus, 10 times more than could be estimated from the data available from hospitals and surgeries. As a result, the fatality rate has now been downgraded to a paltry 0.03 per cent, meaning that swine flu is 100 times less lethal than Spanish flu. “What we didn’t know at the time was that there were a large number of asymptomatic carriers,” explains Prof Openshaw.

Having said that, swine flu has tended to target people between the ages of 15 and 45, a group not normally at risk from seasonal flu, which has, the experts say, fully justified the NHS’s decision to provide early treatment with Tamiflu. In the United States, points out Prof Openshaw, those infected did not get antivirals until much later, and admissions of young adults to intensive care units have been far higher.

In fact, if anything, he believes we need to deliver antivirals and vaccines even faster next time – which is why he would like to see the NHS “iron out the bottlenecks” in its distribution system. That is a message seconded by Prof Oxford, who points to the “salutary” experience of Ukraine, where a huge surge in swine flu infections late last year brought the country’s medical system to its knees and had politicians scrabbling for supplies of Tamiflu and vaccines.

Prof Oxford also warns that the winter flu season is by no means over, and that vaccination could prove vital if, as he expects, H1N1 returns next year. “Swine flu is behaving in classic Darwinian fashion,” he says. “It has already displaced 99 per cent of the other flu viruses out there. My worry is that when it gets into the elderly next year, we could see many more deaths.” So far there have been 390 deaths in the UK.

No doubt Wodarg and his supporters will see this as a further example of scaremongering. The issue, they say, is not whether swine flu poses a risk but whether the risk is big enough to justify the diversion of precious funds to influenza vaccines, when diseases such as heart disease and hypertension kill many more people each year. And the row is not likely to be resolved any time soon. Although the government is now holding talks with GlaxoSmithKline to find a way of disposing of 60 million unwanted doses of vaccine, analysts predict that it and other vaccine manufacturers stand to make windfall profits of around £4 billion.

Yet rather than looking for scapegoats, Prof Barclay says we should be grateful that the pandemic turned out to be so mild. “In many ways, swine flu has been a dress rehearsal,” she says. “Next time, we may not be so fortunate.”

H1N1 needle blamed for partial paralysis

February 5, 2010

MICHELE MANDEL
Canoe.ca
February 1, 2010

Downstairs in the rehab wing of Markham Stouffville hospital, in a private room with a sunny window, lies Donna Hartlen, a young mother who is now partially paralyzed.

The Whitby woman can’t stand without leaning on a walker and her legs are too numb to allow her to walk for more than a few steps. The right side of her face is paralyzed, she can’t properly chew solid food and her right eye is bandaged because she can no longer blink to protect it.

Until five weeks ago, she was a perfectly healthy woman spending Christmas with her family in Nova Scotia. And then on Dec. 29 she was rushed to an emergency room in Halifax, suddenly unable to stand on feet.

The doctors diagnosed her with Guillain-Barre syndrome, a rare neurological condition characterized by sudden weakness or paralysis. And while no one seems willing to discuss the likely cause, the 39-year-old knows exactly where the fault lies.

She blames the H1N1 flu shot she received on Dec. 13 – two weeks before her symptoms suddenly appeared.

Of course, there is no way to know for certain. But Hartlen has only grown more convinced since chatting by chance in the hall with the older gentleman from the hospital room next door.

// //

Don Gibson has GBS as well, with legs so numb now that he is confined to a wheelchair. It turns out that not only was he also vaccinated against H1N1, but he got the shot just two days before Hartlen, in the very same Markham doctors’ office.

“It’s way too coincidental,” insists the slight mom, her words slurred because the right side of her face will not move. “It’s either a bad batch or a lot more people are getting this than they are talking about.”

Her 80-year-old neighbour is equally convinced that the H1N1 vaccine to blame. “It must have been a bad batch,” Gibson believes. “But nobody is saying anything. I know I signed a piece of paper and there’s no liability but it’s pretty scary.”

They are now comrades in arms, an unlikely duo who share a rare illness and a similar vaccination history that no one wants to acknowledge.

According to the Public Health Agency, there are about 600-700 new GBS cases a year in Canada, caused usually by food-borne bacteria, respiratory infections or surgery.

“The risk of getting GBS after any flu vaccine is about one case for every million doses distributed,” the website says. “The benefit of the vaccine outweighs this theoretical risk.”

So far, the agency says they haven’t had any unusual spike in GBS – there’s been 22 cases following the H1N1 vaccination – or .87 per million doses distributed. But Hartlen questions how many GBS patients are actually being reported; she says she was the one who finally called her local public health department because no medical professional seemed interested in the possible connection.

“Not a single doctor we’ve talked with will even remotely discuss that it’s the H1N1 shot,” marvels Hartlen. “They almost pretend they don’t hear you. They don’t want to alarm the public and they don’t want you to stir up trouble.”

So GBS patients like Hartlen and Gibson are on their own.

Right now, Quebec is the only province with a no-fault vaccine injury compensation program in place.

“It’s a horror story of how little Ontario will do to help patients that come down with this after the government promotes it so much,” complains her husband, Wayne Burke.

They have two little girls at home, just 4 and 2. He works full-time at Telus; she was a self-employed business systems analyst. With no family in Whitby, they flew in her parents from Nova Scotia, but the elderly couple can’t look after the kids indefinitely.

Meanwhile, Hartlen has been told it can take months – and up to a year – before she completely regains all movement. So how is the partially-paralyzed mom supposed to take care of two young children until then?

“If my kids were 10 and 12 it would be different. But a four and two-year-old need 100% attention and I can’t give it to them,” she worries.

So she’s hardly unreasonable in expecting some kind of government support. But after countless phone conversations with every level of bureaucrat, she’s learned there will be no such thing.

“They’re the ones who push this vaccine. They promote it every five minutes on TV. So I do what they say and I get GBS and they’re not going to help me?

“I need help for my kids – I’m not looking for anything extravagant. I’m not an ambulance chaser. I don’t want to sue anybody. I just want to get my kids looked after while their father is at work.”

Instead, there is only a shameful silence.

Ukrainian Black Lung Death Toll Over 1000, Over A Quarter-Million Hospitalized

January 27, 2010

Vince Veneziani
The Business Insider
January 26, 2010

The mutated version of the H1N1 Swine Flu is truly wrecking havoc throughout Eastern Europe, with the Ukrainian death toll now clocking in at 1005 dead, according to Before It’s News.

And to make matters worse, over 250,000 have been hospitalized over the deadly flu strain; that number is set to rise.

Pharmaceutical companies accused of crying wolf over swine flu

January 26, 2010

Russia Today
January 25, 2010

Swine flu is under scrutiny once again as pharmaceutical companies are being accused of hyping up a “false pandemic”. The Council of Europe has put the virus on its winter agenda, which starts on Monday.

flu pandemic   Pharmaceutical companies accused of crying wolf over  swine flu

A representative from the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe claims the World Health Organization colluded with major drug companies and changed the definition of “pandemic” to ensure maximum profits with no risks for the pharmaceutical firms.

If PACE is putting forward the theory that the swine flu hysteria was engineered by pharmaceutical companies to generate revenue, then Ukraine is a perfect example.

The first revelations of the flu epidemic in Ukraine back in October 2009 caused panic across the country. News of the pandemic dominated the agenda of most of the Ukrainian mass media.

Public reaction was so strong that all anti-flu products flew off the shelves of pharmacies and drug stores across the country.

In the first several weeks of the flu rush it was almost impossible to find any medication against it in the pharmacies due to panic buying. Of course, pharmaceutical companies in Ukraine profited from the hysteria. This continued until the late stages of November 2009.

The joint profits of all the pharmaceutical organizations in Ukraine in October 2009 alone amounted to over $200 million, which was more than they had earned during the entire year before.

Thoughts about the “epidemic outbreak” resurged right in the middle of the presidential election campaign in Ukraine. Public mood suggested that the epidemic was being used by politicians as one of the factors in the campaign in an attempt to gain more votes from the electorate.

The biggest controversy surrounds the antiviral drug Tamiflu, which was believed to be the most effective means of combating swine flu – not in the sense of actually preventing the disease, but curing a person already infected with the virus.

When the first delivery of 300 tons of Tamiflu was delivered to Ukraine, Prime Minister Yulia Timoshenko revealed that some pharmacies had already sold the drug at ten times the original price. She declared that any private pharmacy which demands steep prices for the drug would suffer legal consequences.

Later on she announced that the Tamiflu drug that Ukraine had received from Switzerland will not go to pharmacies, but directly to hospitals to help those already infected with H1N1 (the proper term for swine flu).

Despite Tamiflu being presented as the most effective medicine against H1N1, a respectable British medical journal wrote later on that it was doubtful whether the medication could actually help anyone suffering from H1N1.

As it turned out, the number of those who died of swine flu in Ukraine turned out to be less than the country loses annually due to regular seasonal flu, so the supposed swine flu epidemic is of little concern now.

Currently, all registered flu-related deaths in Ukraine are attributed to the ordinary flu virus strain.

Since swine flu does not make it to the headlines anymore, it looks like the previously announced purchase of anti-flu vaccine from countries like Canada and Switzerland have been cancelled.

“It’s incredible what is happening”

Dr Wolfgang Wodarg, the Chairman of the PACE Health Committee, told RT that the “World Health Organization is the institution that holds the biggest responsibility” for spreading news about “pandemic” swine flu.

“The WHO installed a private public partnership with pharmaceutical companies that started some eight years ago, and it seems that the pharmaceutical industry has very successfully influenced it because they had a lot profit with two false alarms of the WHO,” exclaimed Wodarg. “First, it was a bird’s flu alarm which never happened. Bird’s flu did not exist as a disease spread from one human being to another. And the second was the swine flu alarm, which was just a normal flu we experience every year, and even milder than most of the years.”

The expenses that followed the marketing used on scientists to impress governments to make contracts have already totaled billions of dollars, said Dr Wolfgang Wodarg.

Doctors Vaccinate for Profit

January 26, 2010

Christina England
VacTruth.com
January 25, 2010

Years ago children were sent up chimneys or sold as servants to earn their parents extra money. Now they are being vaccinated by doctors, to boost their takings. Doctors, Governments and Pharma see our children as their property and are making thousands of pounds/dollars/euros out of them right under our noses. This, they call ‘Health Care’, I call it the legalization of child labour.

For years now we have been told that vaccines are good for us, that vaccines eradicate illness and that vaccines will save us from killer diseases. What we are not told is that the doctors and Governments telling us this are often linked to the drug companies who are manufacturing the vaccines that they promote and many are making thousands of pounds/dollars profit from vaccinating our children.

Let us begin at the bottom and start with the GP. In the UK every time a vaccine is given to us by our trusted GP they are paid. The British Medical Journal published an article GPs make deals with local NHS to vaccinate children against swine fluexplaining how that every single child who is vaccinated with the H1N1 in the UK will earn the GP #5.25.

In Ireland the GP’s are paid five times this amount, for the seasonal flu shot. The article Irish Times – Irish GP’s paid five times UK rate for flu vaccine report that in Ireland a GP will earn a staggering [euro]38.95 per vaccine, making vaccines a very lucrative business indeed.

As far back as 2002, GP’s were so keen to get their hands on this extra money that they were striking off their lists the children who had not had the MMR because if they (the GP’s ) did not meet the Government target rate of 90% immunization, they would not earn their #2865 vaccination bonus Daily Telegraph – Children without MMR jab struck off GP’s list reports tells the full story.

In another article The campaign for Gardasil Flawed it is reported that Merck actually seeks out and trains doctors to lecture for them on Gardasil, paying them $4,500 each time they lecture on the Gardasil vaccine. Doctors are making thousands of dollars doing this.

This is nothing new and is not just attributed to vaccines. Doctors have been doing this for years.

In the article Ex-Drug Sales Rep Tells All – ABC News

one drugs representative spills the beans and tells a Congressional committee what really goes on. Speaking about Eli Lilly he told the committee:-

To sell their drugs, pharmaceutical companies hire former cheerleaders and ex-models to wine and dine doctors, exaggerate the drug’s benefits and underplay their side-effects”

Shahram Ahari, who spent two years selling Prozac and Zypraxa for Eli Lily, told a Senate Aging Committee chaired by Sen. Herb Kohl, D-Wisc., that his job involved ” rewarding physicians with gifts and attention for their allegiance to your product and company despite what may be ethically appropriate.”

Ahari claimed that drug companies like hiring former cheerleaders and ex-models, as well as former athletes and members of the military, many of whom have no background in science to wine and dine the doctors explaining the wonderful benefits of the drug they are employed to sell.

Higher up the you have leading figures in the medical profession who advise Governments on vaccine policies have strong links and alliances with the drugs companies helping them peddle their wares.

The article Children Risk Untested Flu Vaccines in Hyped Pandemic – Child Health Safety shows some very interesting links with the key figures who advise our Governments and drug companies.

Dr Salisbury the Medical Director for the Department of Health and a key figure in the JCV I who advises the UK Government on vaccine policies is shown to be linked by association with drug companies.

“Dr Salisbury is also linked by association to drug companies. Dr Salisbury as the Medical Secretary for the Department of Health is also a member of the Joint Committee on Vaccination and Immunisation. The JCVI has the task of approving UK vaccines. Many JCVI members have declared interests in a variety of drug companies when discussing the flu pandemic [ “JCVI meeting on 13th February 2008]. These financial ties include vaccine manufacturers Merck, GlaxoSmithKline, Sanofi Pasteur and Novartis. The JCVI is reportedly involved in attempts to hide evidence that the MMR vaccine can cause brain inflammation and permanent brain damage. [“Vaccine E-Newsletter March 20, 2009 Vaccine Bullies & Fighting Back by Barbara Loe Fisher]“

Another Government figure found to be linked to drugs companies is Kathleen Sebelius The US Health and Human Services Secretary. She has been found to have strong links to Glaxo Smith Kline.

In early 2009 the US Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius told The Associated Press that she was urging school superintendents around the USA to spend the summer preparing for the possibility that schoolchildren could be first in line for swine flu vaccine in the fall, if the USA Government decided to go ahead with mass vaccinations:-

“If you think about vaccinating kids, schools are the logical place,” She said. [“Kids May Get Swine Flu Shot First Lauran Neergaard June 16th 2009]

However, she did promise careful surveillance. Sebelius has strong alliances to drug companies. [“GlaxoSmithKline website] announced her appointment stating that she could work with them to save ‘World Health’ and get out of the ‘Healthcare mess’, if they (GSK) gave the Government the ‘right attention’”

So can we trust the doctors and the Governments to keep our children safe? Sadly it seems that many are not really putting the safety of their patients before their ever increasing pay packets. Their loyalty is to the drug companies and not their patients, so what is the truth about the vaccinations used today?

Fortunately for us, we have a strong and growing army of ‘real doctors‘, who are less interested in the ‘nice little earners’ are more interested in keeping the public informed and safe. They have a very different view of what vaccines are doing to our health and our immune systems.

Dr Viera Scheibner a well trusted doctor, Principle Research Scientist (Rtd) and now prominent public campaigner,is so sure of her facts she sent a letter to the Medical Observer, an Australian medical newspaper. This letter by Dr Viera Scheibner , was sent to and published in the Medical Observer, an Australian medical newspaper, in February 1999.

She challenged Simon Chapman who wrote an article challenging the anti- vaccination movement in Australia to ‘TAKE HIS OWN MEDICINE’

She began by saying

“On February 19, 1999, the Medical Observer published an article by Simon Chapman, in which he issued a challenge to the anti-vaccination movement in Australia.

My response to his provocative article is as follows:

If vaccines are such a blessing I challenge Simon Chapman to appear on television and allow himself to be injected with all baby vaccines, adjusted to his body weight by a doctor of my choice and in my presence.

The vaccines to be administered to Simon are as follows:

* DtaP: 3 doses within 4 months
* Hib (any conjugates): 3 doses within 4 months

* OPV or IPV: 3 doses within 4 months
* Hep B: 3 doses within 1 month of each other.

The time of the first dose represents month 0.

There isn’t a better way to demonstrate to us that vaccines are safe and effective than by Simon taking his own medicine.

Seems fair enough to me but as expected her letter was never answered.

Dr Scheibner has always had very strong views on vaccination and has been quoted making the following statements:-

Vaccination procedures are a highly politically motivated non-science, whose practitioners are only interested in injecting multitudes of vaccines without much interest or care as to their effects. Data collection on reactions to vaccines is only paid lip service, and the obvious ineffectiveness of vaccines to prevent diseases is glossed over. The fact that natural infectious diseases have beneficial effect on the maturation and development of the immune system is ignored or deliberately suppressed. Consequently, parents of small children and any potential recipients of vaccines and any orthodox medications should be wary of any member of the medical establishment (which is little more than a highly politicised business system) extolling the non-existent virtues of vaccination.”–Viera Scheibner

“I did not find it difficult to conclude that there is no evidence whatsoever that vaccines or any kind are effective in preventing the infectious diseases they are supposed to prevent. Further, adverse effects are amply documented and are far more significant to public health than any adverse effects of infectious diseases. Immunizations not only did not prevent any infectious diseases, they caused more suffering and more deaths than has any other human activity in the entire history of medical intervention. It will be decades before the mopping-up after the disasters caused by childhood vaccination will be completed.”—Dr. Viera Scheibner, PhD

She is not the only doctor to hold such strong views. Dr Harold Buttram M.D holds similar views. He has said:-

“Safety studies on vaccinations are limited to short time periods only: several days to several weeks. There are NO (NONE) long term (months or years) safety studies on any vaccination or immunization. For this reason, there are valid grounds for suspecting that many delayed-type vaccine reactions may be taking place unrecognized at to their true nature.Dr Buttram MD

“As reported in a letter to the New England Journal of Medicine in 1984, tests of T-lymphocyte subpopulations were done on 11 healthy adults before-and-after routine tetanus booster immunizations. Tests showed a significant though temporary drop in T-helper lymphocytes (a class of white blood cells which helps govern the immune system) in all of the subjects. Special concern rests in the fact that in 4 of the subjects the T-helper cells fell to levels found in active AIDS patients. (2) If this was the result of a single vaccine in healthy adults, it is sobering to think of the consequences of the multiple vaccines (twenty-one at last count) routinely given to infants with their immature systems during the first six months of life. However, we can only speculate as to the consequences, as this test has never been repeated. Dr Buttram MD

The list of doctors and professionals stating that vaccines are dangerous is growing. Dr Sherri Tenpenny says in a short article  Defending the Right to Poison

“I have a little person in my office who had 10 rounds of antibiotics and 17 vaccines by 20 months of age. Yes, now autistic. That should be assault with deadly weapons and the doctor should be in jail. Instead, the parents were kicked out of their pediatrician’s practice for refusing more vaccines and wanting to get their child well. With these annoying, non-compliant parents out of the way, that doctor can continue to do what vaccinators do: Inject toxic substances into children, ruining their health and the lives of the child’s family members”

Dr Mayer Eisenstein Homefirst Medical Services treats thousands of never- vaccinated children. The Homefirst Medical Services director has said on many occasions that he is not aware of any cases of autism in unvaccinated children.

Dr Eisenstein said that the Homefirst Medical Services has taken care of about 30,000 to 35,000 unvaccinated children over the years and he does not remember a single case of autism in children who never received vaccines

For over 30 years Dr. Eisenstein has been fighting the good fight against vaccinations and struggling to legitimize alternative therapies. In recent years the evidence about the fantastic healing properties of Vitamin D has captured his attention along with that of other meaningful supplements which promote better health naturally. On his live radio show, he dispenses his wisdom and knowledge while his ever more popular Webinars continue to bring on great guests to tackle the most controversial health issues of the day

Recently in a disgusted interview he said-

“Now They Want to Inject Our Children with 2 Doses of H1N1 Vaccine!!! Not My Children!! …How pathetic! Tested on 474 children, and they want to give it to millions of children! Since the public overwhelmingly is rejecting this ineffective and dangerous vaccine the government needed to come up with a plan so as not to be accused of pork spending for a “pork vaccine”. Now I know what the Obama administration is planning to do with the millions of unused Swine Flu vaccines that they purchased. They will give 2 doses to our children and if that does not work they will give 3 doses. Just Say No!”— Mayer Eisenstein MD, JD, MPH

Another real doctor is Dr Andrew Moulden who has said for years that vaccinations cause MASS Ischemia: Cellular Injury and the ischemic Penumbra – the progression of hypoxia in the Brain – Cores” neural tracts from the inside out. He says that this creates a series of disconnections to the brain’s wiring – locally and or systemically (autism) to progressively (dementia) and intermittently (Multiple sclerosis, CIDP, ADEM)..and more..including autistic enterocolitis and bowel disorders.

He explains everything on his website BrainGuard and shows fascinating videos that prove his theories.

Dr Mark Geier is another real doctor who is more interested in the welfare of children and the right to information than lining his own pocket. He has been fighting against mercury in vaccinations for years. For his beliefs the Governments and Big Pharma have trashed his reputation and even taken him to court but like many other professionals speaking on these issues, he battles on, speaking recently at a Mercury Free Vaccine Rally out side the CDC building in front of hundreds of parents with autistic children.

He believes that it is the Mercury in the vaccines that causes Autism and has advocated for many years to rid all vaccinations of Mercury.

The real doctors are the ones who turn their back on dirty dealings and who remember their Hippocratic Oath. This is an old oath historically taken by doctors swearing to ethically practice medicine. It is widely believed to have been written by Hippocrates the father of western medicine, in Ionic Greek (late 5th century BC), or by one of his students, and is usually included in the Hippocratic Corpus. The phrase “first do no harm” said in Latin as Primum non nocere is often, incorrectly, attributed to the oath. Although mostly of historical and traditional value, the oath is considered a rite of passage for practitioners of medicine in some countries, although nowadays the modernized version of the text varies among the countries.

The Hippocratic Oath (orkos) is one of the most widely known of Greek medical texts. It requires a new physician to swear upon a number of healing gods that he will uphold a number of professional ethical standards.

The Oath says nothing about having links to drugs companies and lining ones pockets at the possible expense of the patient and it says nothing about injecting patients with doses of lethal cocktails of poisons and hoping for the best.

The real doctors are the ones that are not afraid to stand up and fight for the the rights of their patient. The real doctors ‘first do no harm’ and do not put money before the safety of our children.

What ’skeptics’ really believe about vaccines, medicine, consciousness and the universe

January 25, 2010

Mike Adams
Natural News
January 24, 2010

In the world of medicine, “skeptics” claim to be the sole protectors of intellectual truth. Everyone who disagrees with them is just a quack, they insist. Briefly stated, “skeptics” are in favor of vaccines, mammograms, pharmaceuticals and chemotherapy. They are opponents of nutritional supplements, herbal medicine, chiropractic care, massage therapy, energy medicine, homeopathy, prayer and therapeutic touch.

featured stories   What skeptics really believe about vaccines,  medicine, consciousness and the universe
featured stories   What skeptics really believe about vaccines,  medicine, consciousness and the universe
Drones are not equal to a being of energy with a consciousness and a soul, inhabiting a human body with purpose and awareness.

But there’s much more that you need to know about “skeptics.” As you’ll see below, they themselves admit they have no consciousness and that there is no such thing as a soul, a spirit or a higher power. There is no life after death. In fact, there’s not much life in life when you’re a skeptic.

What skeptics really believe

I thought it would be interesting to find out exactly what “skeptics” actually believe, so I did a little research and pulled this information from various “skeptic” websites. What I found will make you crack up laughing so hard that your abs will be sore for a week. Take a look…

• Skeptics believe that ALL vaccines are safe and effective (even if they’ve never been tested), that ALL people should be vaccinated, even against their will, and that there is NO LIMIT to the number of vaccines a person can be safely given. So injecting all children with, for example, 900 vaccines all at the same time is believed to be perfectly safe and “good for your health.”

• Skeptics believe that fluoride chemicals derived from the scrubbers of coal-fired power plants are really good for human health. They’re so good, in fact, that they should be dumped into the water supply so that everyone is forced to drink those chemicals, regardless of their current level of exposure to fluoride from other sources.

• Skeptics believe that many six-month-old infants need antidepressant drugs. In fact, they believe that people of all ages can be safely given an unlimited number of drugs all at the same time: Antidepressants, cholesterol drugs, blood pressure drugs, diabetes drugs, anti-anxiety drugs, sleeping drugs and more — simultaneously!

• Skeptics believe that the human body has no ability to defend itself against invading microorganism and that the only things that can save people from viral infections are vaccines.

• Skeptics believe that pregnancy is a disease and childbirth is a medical crisis. (They are opponents of natural childbirth.)

• Skeptics do not believe in hypnosis. This is especially hilarious since they are all prime examples of people who are easily hypnotized by mainstream influences.

• Skeptics believe that there is no such thing as human consciousness. They do not believe in the mind; only in the physical brain. In fact, skeptics believe that they themselves are mindless automatons who have no free will, no soul and no consciousness whatsoever.

• Skeptics believe that DEAD foods have exactly the same nutritional properties as LIVING foods (hilarious!).

• Skeptics believe that pesticides on the crops are safe, genetically modified foods are safe, and that any chemical food additive approved by the FDA is also safe. There is no advantage to buying organic food, they claim.

• Skeptics believe that water has no role in human health other than basic hydration. Water is inert, they say, and the water your toilet is identical to water from a natural spring (assuming the chemical composition is the same, anyway).

• Skeptics believe that all the phytochemicals and nutrients found in ALL plants are inert, having absolutely no benefit whatsoever for human health. (The ignorance of this intellectual position is breathtaking…)

• Skeptics believe that the moon has no influence over life on Earth. Farming in sync with moon cycles is just superstition, they say. (So why are the cycles of life for insects, animals and humans tied to the moon, then?)

• Skeptics believe that the SUN has no role in human health other than to cause skin cancer. They completely deny any healing abilities of light.

• Skeptics believe that Mother Nature is incapable of synthesizing medicines. Only drug companies can synthesize medicines, they claim. (So why do they copy molecules from nature, then?)

• Skeptics do not believe in intuition. They believe that mothers cannot “feel” the emotions of their infants at a distance. They write off all such “psychic” events as mere coincidence.

• Skeptics believe that all healing happens from the outside, from doctors and technical interventions. They do not believe that patients have any ability to heal themselves. Thus, they do not ascribe any responsibility for health to patients. Rather, they believe that doctors and technicians are responsible for your health. Anyone who dismisses doctors and takes charge of their own health is therefore acting “irresponsibly,” they claim.

• Skeptics believe that cell phone radiation poses absolutely no danger to human health. A person can be exposed to unlimited cell phone radiation without any damage whatsoever.

• Skeptics believe that aspartame and artificial chemical sweeteners can be consumed in unlimited quantities with no ill effects.

• Skeptics believe that human beings were born deficient in synthetic chemicals and that the role of pharmaceutical companies is to “restore” those deficiencies in humans by convincing them to swallow patented pills.

• Skeptics believe that you can take unlimited pharmaceuticals, be injected with an unlimited number of vaccines, expose yourself to unlimited medical imaging radiation, consume an unlimited quantity of chemicals in processed foods and expose yourself to an unlimited quantity of environmental chemical toxins with absolutely no health effects whatsoever!

All the beliefs listed above were compiled from “skeptics” websites. (I’m not going to list those websites here because they don’t deserve the search engine rankings, but you can find them yourself through Google, if you wish.)

Skeptics aren’t consistently skeptical

If you really look closely at the beliefs of “skeptics,” you discover their skepticism is selective. They’re really skeptical about some things — like vitamins — but complete pushovers on others such as the scientific credibility of drug company studies.

Here are some of the many things that “skeptics” should be skeptical about, but aren’t:

• Skeptics aren’t skeptical about the corruption and dishonesty in the pharmaceutical industry. They believe whatever the drug companies say, without asking a single intelligent question.

• Skeptics aren’t skeptical about medical journals. They believe whatever they read in those journals, even when much of it turns out to be complete science fraud.

• Skeptics aren’t skeptical about the profit motive of the pharmaceutical industry. They believe that drug companies are motivated by goodwill, not by profits.

• Skeptics aren’t skeptical about the motivations and loyalties of the FDA. They will swallow, inject or use any product that’s FDA approved, without a single reasonable thought about the actual safety of those products.

• Skeptics aren’t skeptical about the safety of synthetic chemicals used in the food supply. They just swallow whatever poisons the food companies dump into the foods.

• Skeptics aren’t skeptical about the enormous dangers of ionizing radiation from mammograms and CT scans. They have somehow convinced themselves that “early detection saves live” when, in reality, “early radiation causes cancer.”

• Skeptics aren’t skeptical about the mass-drugging agenda of the psychiatric industry which wants to diagnose everyone with some sort of “mental” disorder. The skeptics just go right along with it without asking a single commonsense question about whether the human brain really needs to be “treated” with a barrage of mind-altering chemicals.

• Skeptics aren’t skeptical about mercury fillings. What harm could mercury possibly do anyway? If the ADA says they’re safe, they must be!

• Skeptics aren’t skeptical about the demolition-style collapse of the World Trade Center 7 building on September 11, 2001 — a building that was never hit by airplanes. This beautifully-orchestrated collapse of a hardened structure could only have been accomplished with precision explosives. ( http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MwSc…) Astonishingly, “skeptics” have little understanding of the laws of physics. Concrete-and-steel buildings don’t magically collapse in a perfect vertical demolition just because of a fire on one floor…

• Skeptics aren’t skeptical about the safety of non-stick cookware, or the dangers of cleaning chemicals in the home, or the contamination of indoor air with chemical fumes from carpets, paints and particle board furniture. To the skeptics, the more chemicals, the better!

Nature is bad, chemicals are good

Summing up the position of the “skeptics” is quite simple: Nature is bad, chemicals are good!

If we only had more chemicals injected into more babies, the world would be a better place, they say. If we could only ban all plants, herbs, vitamins and supplements, we’d all be so much healthier because then we’d take more pharmaceuticals!

Seriously. This is what they believe. They openly admit this is their position.

And all you people drinking green smoothies, and growing your own food, and getting natural sunlight, and taking care of your own health, and drinking herbal tea… well you’re all just fools, say the skeptics. You’re all just too stupid to understand “real” science. Because if you understood real science, you’d give up all those useless herbs and superfoods and healing vegetables and you’d be taking twenty different prescription medications instead.

Then you’d be really smart, see. Because all those chemicals make you healthy and smart. A few extra vaccine injections will make you even smarter. Then you can join the skeptics because you’re smart enough at that point to understand that chemicals are the answer to all of life’s problems: Depression, anxiety, digestion, sexual performance, sleep, even test-taking abilities… there’s a chemical “solution” to every problem you might experience.

What skeptics really are

I hope it’s fairly obvious to you by now that skeptics are the most misinformed people on the planet.

They are the easiest people to fool. They’re the easiest to hypnotize, too, because they lack independent thinking skills. Rather than thinking for themselves, they have joined a “club of skeptics” where they can be told what to think and then label themselves “intelligent” for following others in the group.

These are the people who line up to be injected with useless H1N1 vaccines. (The joke is on them, of course. Those vaccines were a complete fraud…) These are the people who stand in line at the pharmacy to buy a dozen different prescriptions (costing sometimes thousands of dollars) that their doctors told them to take. These are the people who eat processed, dead junk food laced with chemicals that make them sick — and then they wonder why they’re sick. These are the people who sit at home watching television and think to themselves how smart they are because they follow the medical advice they learned in drug company advertisements.

These are the real “skeptics.” They are so incredibly isolated from reality that they don’t even believe in their body’s own ability to heal itself.

Skeptics don’t believe in a higher power of any kind: No God, no spirit, no angels, no guides, no creative force in the universe… nada. They think the universe is a cold, empty, lonely, stupid place full of soulless, mindless, zombie biological bodies who have no free will and no consciousness.

Gee, no wonder these skeptics are so misguided. They have the most pessimistic view possible. No wonder they seek to destroy themselves with chemicals — they don’t even think they’re alive to begin with! Skeptics are bent on self destruction. And they believe that when you die, the lights just go out and you cease to exist. Nothing happens after that. You’re just a mindless biological robot whose life has no meaning, no purpose, no higher self.

This is exactly what the skeptics believe. They’ll even tell you so themselves!

Never argue with drones

Realizing this, it makes it so much easier to debate with skeptics on any topic. Whatever they say, you just answer, “WHO is saying that? Are YOU, a conscious, free-thinking person with a mind and soul saying that, or are those words simply being automatically and robotically uttered from the mouth of a bag of bones and skin that has no mind and no soul?”

If they answer you honestly, they will have to admit that they believe they are nothing more than a robotic bag of bones and skin that is mindlessly uttering whatever nonsense happens to escape their mechanical lips. At that point, you’ve already won the debate because YOU have a soul, and THEY don’t. You’re arguing with a mindless robot.

Seriously. Think about this deeply. If you believe what the skeptics want you to believe (because they are always right, of course), then you must accept the fact that THEY have no consciousness. They are not really “alive.” They are just robotic biological machines. They are drones, in other words. And drones are not equal to a being of energy with a consciousness and a soul, inhabiting a human body with purpose and awareness.

Never argue with drones. You only waste your time and annoy the drone.

Skeptics… zombies… drones… different words for the same thing. Soulless, mindless, lacking consciousness and free will, having no awareness of the value of life… these are the skeptics arguing for vaccines, mammograms and chemotherapy today. They are agents of death who can only find solace in an industry of death — the industry of modern medicine.