HIV/AIDS Skepticism

Pointing to evidence that HIV is not the necessary and sufficient cause of AIDS

Vaccines: The good, the bad, and the ugly

Posted by Henry Bauer on 2017/05/21

Only in recent years have I begun to wonder whether there are reasons not to follow official recommendations about vaccination. In the 1930s, I had the then-usual vaccinations, including (in Austria, perhaps Europe) against smallpox. A few others in later years when I traveled quite a bit.

But the Andrew Wakefield affair *, and the introduction of Gardasil **, showed me that official sources had become as untrustworethy about vaccines as they have become about prescription drugs.

It seems that Big Pharma had just about run out of new diseases to invent against which to create drugs and had turned to snake-oil-marketing of vaccines. We are told, for example, that 1 in 3 people will experience shingles in their lifetime and should get vaccinated against it. Have one in three of your aged friends ever had shingles? Not among my family and friends. One of my buddies got himself vaccinated, and came down with shingles a couple of weeks later. His physician asserted that the attack would have been more severe if he hadn’t been vaccinated — no need for a control experiment, or any need to doubt official claims.

So it’s remarkable that the Swedish Government has resisted attempts to make vaccinations compulsory (“Sweden bans mandatory vaccinations over ‘serious health concerns’” by Baxter Dmitry, 12 May 2017).

That article includes extracts from an interview of Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., on the Tucker Carlson Show, which included such tidbits as the continued presence of thimerosal (organic mercury compound) in many vaccines including the seasonal flu vaccines that everyone is urged to get; and the huge increase in number of things against which vaccination is being recommended:

“I got three vaccines and I was fully compliant. I’m 63 years old. My children got 69 doses of 16 vaccines to be compliant. And a lot of these vaccines aren’t even for communicable diseases. Like Hepatitis B, which comes from unprotected sex, or using or sharing needles – why do we give that to a child on the first day of their life? And it was loaded with mercury.”

 

————————————————–

“Autism and Vaccines: Can there be a final unequivocal answer?”
      “YES: Thimerosal CAN induce autism”

** See “Gardasil and Cervarix: Vaccination insanity” and many other posts recovered with SEARCH for “Gardasil” on my blogs: https://scimedskeptic.wordpress.com/?s=gardasil and https://hivskeptic.wordpress.com/?s=gardasil

Advertisements

2 Responses to “Vaccines: The good, the bad, and the ugly”

  1. HIV is still an essential vitamin said

    Autism-vaccines?: See a definitive independent review at http://www.pseudoexpertise.com Chapter 6 (free to download pdf). Conclusion is that various vaccines did not cause the autism increase and are/were not a main cause of autism. But the data is not sufficient to rule out possibility of thousands of cases nevertheless resulting from vaccinations.

    As for the merits of vaccinations more generally, I’ll paste in this other content here:
    ~~~~
    Vaccines appear to fit into the same third-rate paradigm as other issuings from the pharma trade. As with other drugs, first an exclusive patented profitable product is identified and then money is invested in persuading everyone that it is crucially important. I think you should consider a recent book titled “Dissolving Illusions: Disease, Vaccines, and The Forgotten History” (Humphries & Bystrianyk, 2013). And a more recent one by Tetyana Obukhanych, who got a PhD in immunology then on reflection decided her education had been very defective anyway. On the internet you can see some of the fanatical personal attacks such non-conforming authors get subjected to by corporate-aligned people.

    You could also consider these comments from a study recently published in a top peer-reviewed journal (Wang et al., 2014).
    “The reported coverage of the measles–rubella (MR) or measles–mumps–rubella (MMR) vaccine is greater than 99% in Zhejiang province. However, the incidence of measles, mumps, and rubella remains high. …. measles, mumps, and rubella remain common diseases throughout Zhejiang province. …. Therefore, the elimination of measles and control of mumps and rubella are urgent public health priorities in local regions.”

    Note that this report is telling us that not just one but all three famous infections (measles, mumps and rubella) have not been effectively countered even by 99% double-coverage of those vaccin-ations in a population of 50 million. This huge study alone suffices to cast large doubts on the vaccine industry’s scientific credibility.

    But maybe you are thinking that that Wang report is just a one-off anomaly, like the famous anecdotal report of men landing on the moon. Well, here are three more I have learned of from Tetyana Obukhanych:
    Nkowane et al 1987 Measles outbreak in a vaccinated school population: epidemiology, chains of transmission, and the role of vaccine failures. Am J Public Health.
    Boullane et al 1991 Major measles epidemic in the region of Quebec despite a 99% vaccine coverage. Canadian J Public Health.
    Sutcliffe et al 1996 Outbreak of measles in a highly vaccinated secondary school population. Canadian Med Assocn.

    The evidence highlighted by Dr Obukhanych and others shows that measles vaccines do indeed generate some sort of immunity, but that it usually lasts only a few months or years, in contrast to the lifelong immunity created by having a relatively trivial natural measles infection in childhood. And this has two adverse consequen-ces. Firstly it increases the risk of measles in older people, for whom it can be more harmful. And secondly it prevents mothers passing on their immunity to their babies, with the result that those infants lack that natural protection and are thus at risk of an infection which can be deadly at that unnatural age.

    Four further things reflect this dubiousness of vaccine science. Firstly that their manufacturers have been granted some peculiar exemption from the normal legal liability for harm caused. Secondly that they are not required to prove actual effectiveness, but merely that they generate some antibodies, even though there is a lot more to the immune system than those antibodies which clearly don’t have effects equivalent to those of the infections themselves…. [cut]

  2. Joseph said

    Something about HepB vaccine by the highest juridiction of the European Union.

    “Where there is a lack of scientific consensus, the proof of the defect of the vaccine and of a causal link between the defect and the damage suffered may be made out by serious, specific and consistent evidence.”

    https://curia.europa.eu/jcms/upload/docs/application/pdf/2017-06/cp170066en.pdf

    http://curia.europa.eu/juris/document/document.jsf;jsessionid=9ea7d2dc30d67bcb4a53b53945ad97049f2c42150a0d.e34KaxiLc3qMb40Rch0SaxyMahr0?text=&docid=192054&pageIndex=0&doclang=EN&mode=lst&dir=&occ=first&part=1&cid=834469

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s