Dr. Lawrence Palevsky Testimony: Unvaccinated Children Are “The Healthiest Children I’ve Ever Seen” | Collective Evolution

Screen-Shot-2020-02-18-at-7.51.11-AMIt’s always worrisome publishing an article about vaccine safety and posting it on Facebook. But why is that? One would think that discussions and concerns about vaccine safety would be encouraged. However, the opposite is true–Facebook has been cracking down on any information that they deem as “anti-vaccine.”

Does this mean that reporting on a study addressing the concerns of aluminum adjuvants in vaccines, for example, will be prevented from spreading and possibly even labelled as “fake news,” despite the fact that it’s been published in a peer-reviewed medical journal?

Does this mean that a paediatrician, like the one below, will also be censored for sharing his opinion based on his research and experience?

Dr. Heidi Larson’s Comments at WHO Summit

I’d like to point out that many scientists presented facts about vaccines and vaccine safety at the recent Global Health Vaccine Safety Summit hosted by the World Health Organization in Geneva, Switzerland. At the conference, Professor Heidi Larson, a Professor of Anthropology and the Risk and Decision Scientist Director at the Vaccine Confidence Project, emphasized that doctors and professionals should forego name-calling with ‘hostile language’ such as “anti-vax”.

She recommended encouraging people to ask questions about vaccine safety. After all, it makes sense–in order to make our vaccines safer and more effective, you would think everybody would be on board with constant questioning and examination. After all, that’s just good science, and it’s in everyone’s best interest. She also brought up the issue of confidence in vaccines:

Dr. Lawrence Palevsky

One of those doctors who is losing confidence in vaccines is Dr. Lawrence Palevsky, a practicing paediatrician trained at the NYU School of Medicine who did his residency at Mt. Sinai Hospital in New York. He spent the first nine years of his career working in emergency rooms running a neonatal intensive care unit. He recently spoke at a forum on vaccines in Connecticut, discussing the repeal of the religious exemption for childhood vaccines. In the video below, he provides a great summary as to why so many parents and physicians continue to become concerned about vaccine safety.

The parents that I work with in New York, that I see around the country are very concerned that their rights are being taken away, that their knowledge about the science is being pushed away by an agenda that only says, unvaccinated children are a problem.

No study has every been done in this country, appropriately, to address the health outcomes of children who are vaccinated versus the children who are unvaccinated. I have been seeing families in my practice for over 20 years, that have opted out of vaccination, they are the healthiest children I’ve ever seen.

Vaccine hesitancy among among health professionals is no longer a secret. A study published in the journal EbioMedicine outlines this point:

Over the past two decades several vaccine controversies have emerged in various countries, including France, inducing worries about severe adverse effects and eroding confidence in health authorities, experts, and science. These two dimensions are at the core of the vaccine hesitancy (VH) observed in the general population. VH is defined as delay in acceptance of vaccination, or refusal, or even acceptance with doubts about its safety and benefits, with all these behaviors and attitudes varying according to context, vaccine, and personal profile, despite the availability of vaccine services VH presents a challenge to physicians who must address their patients’ concerns about vaccines and ensure satisfactory vaccination coverage.

The Takeaway

The scientific community should never stop questioning, especially when it comes to medication. Based on the information that’s come out at the conference mentioned in this article, and the testimony shown above, it’s quite clear that there is a lot of room for improvement when it comes to the development of vaccines and vaccine safety overall. Discussion is always encouraging, as long as it’s peaceful and facts are presented in a proper manner.

It’s better to understand the reasons why a lot of people, parents, scientists and physicians are hesitant about vaccination and appropriately respond, instead of simply using ridicule and hatred, because that’s never effective and both parties cannot move forward that way. At the end of the day, scientists should never cease to question.

Source: Collective Evolution

To Tame Coronavirus, Mao-Style Social Control Blankets China | Economic Times/India Times

wuhan-11-ap

Johnny Liberty, Editor’s Note: This pandemic was likely created from a bioweapons lab in Wuhan and the Chinese Communist Party is showing their true colors in dealing with this humanitarian crisis. The entire world will suffer consequences from this debacle and a global economic slowdown and economic reset is inevitable.

The nation is battling the coronavirus outbreak with a grassroots mobilization reminiscent of former Communist Chairman Mao Zedong’s mass crusades, not seen in China in decades.

China has flooded cities and villages with battalions of neighborhood busybodies, uniformed volunteers and Communist Party representatives to carry out one of the biggest social control campaigns in history.

The goal: to keep hundreds of millions of people away from everyone but their closest kin.

The nation is battling the coronavirus outbreak with a grassroots mobilization reminiscent of former Communist Chairman Mao Zedong’s mass crusades, not seen in China in decades — esse ..

Housing complexes in some cities have issued the equivalents of paper hall passes to regulate how often residents leave their homes. Apartment buildings have turned away their own tenants if they have come from out of town. Train stations block people from entering cities if they cannot prove they live or work there. In the countryside, villages have been gated off with vehicles, tents and other improvised barriers.

Despite China’s arsenal of high-tech surveillance tools, the controls are mainly enforced by hundreds of thousands of workers and volunteers, who check residents’ temperature, log their movements, oversee quarantines and — most important — keep away outsiders who might carry the virus.

Residential lockdowns of varying strictness — from checkpoints at building entrances to hard limits on going outdoors — now cover at least 760 million people in China, or more than half the country’s population, according to a New York Times analysis of government announcements in provinces and major cities. Many of these people live far from the city of Wuhan, where the virus was first reported and which the government sealed off last month.

Throughout China, neighborhoods and localities have issued their own rules about residents’ comings and goings, which means the total number of affected people may be even higher. Policies vary widely, leaving some places in a virtual freeze and others with few strictures.

China’s top leader, Xi Jinping, has called for an all-out “people’s war” to tame the outbreak. But the restrictions have prevented workers from returning to factories and businesses, straining China’s giant economy. And with local officials exercising such direct authority over people’s movements, it is no surprise that some have taken enforcement to extremes.

Li Jing, 40, an associate professor of sociology at Zhejiang University in the eastern city of Hangzhou, was almost barred from taking her husband to a hospital recently after he choked on a fish bone during dinner. The reason? Her neighborhood allows only one person per family to leave the house, every other day.

“Once the epidemic was disclosed, the central government put huge pressure on local officials,” Li said. “That triggered competition between regions, and local governments turned from overly conservative to radical.

“Even when the situation is relieved or if the mortality rate turns out not to be high, the government machine is unable to change direction or tune down,” she added.

China’s prevention efforts are being led by its myriad neighborhood committees, which typically serve as a go-between for residents and local authorities. Supporting them is the government’s “grid management” system, which divides the country into tiny sections and assigns people to watch over each, ensuring a tight grip over a large population.

Zhejiang province, on China’s southeastern seaboard, has a population of nearly 60 million and has enlisted 330,000 “grid workers.” Hubei province, whose capital is Wuhan, has deployed 170,000. The southern province of Guangdong has called upon 177,000, landlocked Sichuan has 308,000, and the megacity of Chongqing has 118,000.

Authorities are also combining enormous manpower with mobile technology to track people who may have been exposed to the virus. China’s state-run cellular providers allow subscribers to send text messages to a hotline that generates a list of provinces they have recently visited.

At a high-speed rail station in the eastern city of Yiwu this past week, workers in hazmat suits demanded that passengers send the text messages that show their location data before being allowed to leave.

n app developed by a state-run maker of military electronics lets Chinese citizens enter their name and national ID number and be told whether they may have come in contact, on a plane, train or bus, with a carrier of the virus.

It is too early to say whether China’s strategy has contained the outbreak. With large numbers of new infections being reported every day, the government has clear reasons for minimizing human contact and domestic travel. But experts said that in epidemics, overbearing measures can backfire, scaring infected people into hiding and making the outbreak harder to control.

“Public health relies on public trust,” said Alexandra Phelan, a specialist in global health law at Georgetown University. “These community-level quarantines and the arbitrary nature in which they’re being imposed and tied up with the police and other officials is essentially making them into punitive actions — a coercive action rather than a public health action.”

In Zhejiang, one of China’s most developed provinces and home to Alibaba and other technology companies, people have written on social media about being denied entry to their own apartments in Hangzhou, the provincial capital. Coming home from out of town, they said, they were asked to produce documents from landlords and employers or be left on the street.

For Nada Sun, who was visiting family in Wenzhou, a coastal city in Zhejiang, a health scare turned into a mandatory quarantine.

When Sun, 29, complained of tightness in her chest this month, her mother told her to go to the hospital. She did not have a high fever, yet the hospital gave her a battery of checks. All came back negative for the virus.

Even so, when she returned to her apartment, she was told that she would be quarantined for two weeks. She was also added to a group on the WeChat messaging app with a local Communist Party secretary and other volunteers in which she has to submit her temperature and location twice a day.

“I’m worried they have too much information,” Sun said.

The lockdowns are not necessarily oppressive. Many people in China have been happy to wall themselves off, ordering groceries online and working from home if they can. Some neighborhood officials act with a humane touch.

Bob Huang, a Chinese-born American living in northern Zhejiang, said the volunteers at his complex had helped chase down a man who stayed out overnight to drink, in violation of rules about how often people can step outside. Yet they also delivered food from McDonald’s to a quarantined family.

Huang, 50, has been able to dodge the restrictions by using a special pass from the property manager, and he has been driving around delivering protective face masks to friends. Some building complexes don’t let him in. Others take down his information.

A nearby village took a less orthodox approach.

“They always start asking questions in the local dialect, and if you can respond in the local dialect, you are allowed to go in,” Huang said. Unable to speak the dialect, he had to wait, though the villagers were friendly. They gave him a folding chair, offered him a cigarette and didn’t ask for an ID.

Some parts of China have imposed other, often severe policies for fending off the epidemic.

Hangzhou has barred pharmacies from selling analgesics to force people with symptoms to seek treatment at hospitals. The eastern city of Nanjing requires anybody who takes a cab to show ID and leave contact information. Yunnan province wants all public places to display QR codes that people must scan with their phones whenever they enter or exit.

Many places have banned large gatherings. Police in Hunan province this month destroyed a mahjong parlor where they found more than 20 people playing the tile game.

With local governments deciding such policies largely on their own, China has become a vast patchwork of fiefs.

“It can be quite haphazard,” said Zhou Xun, a historian of modern China at the University of Essex in England. “A perfect plan on paper often turns into makeshift solutions locally.”

Officials seem to recognize that some local authorities have gone too far. This month, Chen Guangsheng, the deputy secretary-general of Zhejiang’s provincial government, called it “inappropriate” that some places had employed “simple and crude practices,” like locking people into their homes, to enforce quarantines.

National officials on Saturday urged towns and villages to remove unnecessary roadblocks and ensure the smooth transport of food and supplies.

Zhang Yingzi’s apartment complex in Hangzhou initially forbade anybody who had been out of town from entering. Later, the ban was adjusted to cover only people coming from Hubei province and the Zhejiang cities of Wenzhou and Taizhou, both of which have had many cases of the new virus.

“Banning everyone from out of town wasn’t realistic,” said Zhang, 29, an accountant. “There are so many of them, after all. Some needed to come back for work.”

Still, many in China are uneasy about loosening up virus controls too quickly.

Zhang Shu, 27, worries that her parents and neighbors are becoming cavalier about the virus, even as workers drive around her village near Wenzhou with loudspeakers telling people to stay home.

“Ordinary people are slowly starting to feel that the situation isn’t so horrible anymore,” she said. “They are restless.”

“The Marvelous Health of Unvaccinated Children” by Pediatrician Françoise Berthoud

535610_261076333985530_457706443_n“The Marvelous Health of Unvaccinated Children” by Pediatrician Françoise Berthoud https://healthwyze.org/reports/433-the-marvelous-health-of-unvaccinated-children

Dr. Berthoud speaks from his own experience and shares information from four other Countries showing that unvaccinated children are healthier than vaccinated children.  Any pediatrician anywhere can open their patient folders and come to the same conclusion.  When asked what the condition of his patients’ health were, one pediatrician was quoted as saying, “I have healthy patients and vaccinated patients.”

UNVACCINATED & HEALTHY!  http://tobtr.com/s/6109517 ~ This child was spared because of his grandmother’s determination to educate her daughter about vaccination (and everyone else too!). RESPECT!!! ~ Please listen and share to inspire.

“Neonatal Nurse on Vaccines: We are Destroying an Entire Generation of Children”
https://vaccineimpact.com/2019/neonatal-nurse-on-vaccines-we-are-destroying-an-entire-generation-of-children/

Another Pediatrician, Dr. Lawrence Palevsky testifies in Connecticut regarding removal of vaccine exemptions to attend school and clearly reveals the risks of vaccination in his statement to the legislature and even more so in addressing their questions.  He states from experience that the unvaccinated are the healthiest, partially vaccinated are less well and fully vaccinated are the sickest.

Notice that Dr. Philip Incao is stating that “a shocking 31% of children have chronic illness” in 1999, but as of 2011 it was up to 54%.  Now it is conservatively estimated at 70%!  This while the vaccine schedule keeps increasing in dosage and vaccine uptake is high.  Now the recommended schedule of vaccines is 72 doses through age 18!  Common components per the CDC are Aluminum, Formaldehyde, Mercury and MSG.  See more here:  Tinyurl.com/VaccineContents.

“Studies Outside the U.S. Show Unvaccinated Children Healthier than Vaccinated Children – Vaccine Impact” by Christina England https://vaccineimpact.com/2014/studies-outside-the-u-s-show-unvaccinated-children-healthier-than-vaccinated-children/

“Disease Rates of Vaccinated vs Unvaccinated Children” by Paul Fassa ~ “A German study involving several thousands of children, including newborns up to those 19 years of age, has found that vaccinated children have up to 5 times the rate of diseases and disorders compared to the same age group who has not been vaccinated.” https://alignlife.com/articles/immunity/disease-rates-of-vaccinated-vs-unvaccinated-children.  Graph:  https://www.vaccineinjury.info/images/stories/ias1992study.pdf.

US Representative Bill Posey, the lone member of Congress who cares about children and families sponsored legislation to conduct a vaccinated vs. unvaccinated study, which as of 2018 had no co-sponsors:  Tinyurl.com/HR3615.

The Unvaccinated vs. Vaccinated Studies had already been conducted by the CDC, but hidden so that no one would know the results.  The Children’s Health Defense secured this information through a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request: https://vaccinefreehealth.blogspot.com/2019/11/unvaccinated-vs-vaccinated-cdc-did.html

The vaccinated vs. unvaccinated study solely based in reality:  a dozen interviews with families who have both vaccinated and unvaccinated children: https://brightfuture83.wordpress.com/2016/12/19/the-real-vaccinated-vs-unvaccinated-study-on-the-mary-and-sallie-show/.

The next video indicates that while (conservatively speaking) 65% of vaccinated children have chronic illness, LESS THAN 1% of UNVACCINATED DO!  Listen to Joy Garner of TheControlGroup.org with Host Alfred Lambremont Webre of Exopolitics.com on this issue.

This blog update (Tinyurl.com/HealthyUnvaxxed) is In Memory of Erwin Alber who founded the Vaccination Information Network (VINE) and educated MILLIONS of families, many when it was too late (their children vaccine injured or dead from vaccination).  Erwin was a tireless researcher and advocate who delighted in sharing photos of healthy, sparkling-eyed, vaccine-free children.  He worked toward a “Vaccine Free World” as do I.  Please see this blog with endless resources for GOOD information including his website:  Tinyurl.com/VaccineFreeWorldErwin Alber is best known for this quote, “Vaccination is not disease prevention – it’s a particularly nasty form of organized crime in that it manipulates parents’ protective instincts to get them to submit their child into getting poisoned for profit under the guise of disease prevention.”  If you get nothing else from this blog, get that!

Please listen to many interviews with parents who decided to vaccinate, much to their dismay (only one interview among them wherein an INFORMED decision was made not to vaccinate):  http://www.whale.to/c/sallie_elkordy.html.  Then take your time and search John Scudamore’s entire site www.WHALE.to.  Make good use of his memes too!  Since the HPV vaccine has 100 known reactions, here is a blog dedicated to only that vaccine:  Tinyurl.com/LegacyHPV.

“Former “Vaccine Bully” Board-certified Pediatrician Now Claims Unvaccinated Children Are Healthiest” https://vaccineimpact.com/2017/former-vaccine-bully-board-certified-pediatrician-now-claims-unvaccinated-children-are-healthiest/

To all the healthcare workers whose jobs rely on their accepting vaccination(s), I dedicate this story.   Nurse becomes a Quadriplegic after receiving the Flu Shot, years of tests before they eliminated all other causes.  Constant excruciating nerve pain and stroke.  All the Doctors say it was a known reaction but no indication of this before she was given the shot.  Seven other people in the ICU were suffering extreme reactions to the flu shot while she was there.  Eight cases in one hospital’s ICU unit concurrently and none were reported to VAERS (hence no record of them).  They would have given her another flu shot and pneumonia shot too had her daughter not been there to prevent it even though by then her disability was known to have been caused by the shot!  Financially draining, although she has healthcare, pension and her daughter to help, she wouldn’t be alive today per her son-in-law without all that.  She can do nothing for herself, not sew nor croche, not even read.  Her daughter does everything for her.  She said as a nurse she gave shots but did not know the consequences of them. 

The pain was in her hands and feet and joint pain.  Her fingers don’t work.  When her entire body was in pain, even morphine would not help.  Pain is sometimes stabbing and other times aching and spasms.  The Doctor said it was very common but didn’t know what to do for it.  She had one major stroke and two smaller strokes after the shot and they did a lot of damage.  It was a bilateral stroke which is why both sides of her body are paralyzed.  Nurse used to be very active, was a hiker prior, and a gardener with good blood pressure readings.  Very expensive wheelchair which insurance didn’t pay for and is uncomfortable for her.  All she can do for herself is watch television.  Although not forced, this nurse took a flu shot for her health, which couldn’t have devastated her health more.  With 33 doses of vaccines in infants, TWO flu shots among them, just imagine what has happened and is happening to them:  Tinyurl.com/YellowVax.

If you are wondering, “WHY are vaccines offered, let alone administered?”, that is a great question!  Please do your own research and draw your own conclusions.  I always tell people to start by investigating the components in vaccines.  This is what the Centers for Disease Control publishes: Tinyurl.com/VaccineContents.  The recommended schedule is 72 doses through the age of 18 and if pregnant, another 4 doses.  No safety studies have been published for the multiple shots your child will receive in one visit.  No safety studies on vaccinating pregnant women.  No long term safety studies.  No studies on vaccines causing cancer, mutations nor impairment of fertility.

Pediatrician Dr. Franz won’t vaccinate with MMR until age 3 because she has seen too much Autism in children who get it prior to that age.  She will not administer Gardasil at all.  She is concerned with the cumulative affect of vaccine ingredients.  Dr. Franz would not vaccinate her own children because unvaccinated children are across the board healthier.  30 years ago she saw no autism (the doses of vaccines were 1/3 of what they are today).  She doesn’t want to make a lot of money by hurting children (vaccinating them).

Quotes from the Grande Dames of Vaccine Truth:

~ Dr. Viera Scheibner states plainly, “There is no evidence whatsoever of the ability of vaccines to prevent any diseases.

~ Dr. Rebecca Carley refers to vaccines as “Weapons of Mass Destruction” and has written the first SCIENTIFIC EXEMPTION to Vaccines: https://www.brighteon.com/0423daca-611d-4145-88f6-d9ab45b1eca2.

~ Dr. Ghis Lanctot’s remark, “Vaccination is ridiculous.” may appear to downplay the seriousness of vaccine reactions, but in truth Madame Ghis is spot on since it’s certainly ridiculous to inject people with poison and expect their health to flourish!

What can YOU do?  To fight off the current threat of forced inoculation (Tinyurl.com/FearVirus), I suggest everyone perform this simple action NOW:  Tinyurl.com/StopTheShot.  If our push-back is successful, please follow this 3 Step Plan to #SaveOurSpecies from extinction:  Tinyurl.com/2SaveOurSpecies.

Reject these studies, warnings, testimony and suggested actions at your peril.  I impart the words of Forrest Maready, “Good luck with your vaccines!“, but with over 270 vaccines in the pipeline (mostly for adults, with mandates becoming the norm), you’ll need more than luck… start praying, get active or both if you want to survive this onslaught!  TRUTH, over and out.

To your health!,

Sallie O. Elkordy, Child Survival Advocate (Tinyurl.com/VaccineFreeMedia)

P. S. Tinyurl.com/WHOblew & Tinyurl.com/WHOblew2

P. P. S. “99% of Parents who don’t vaccinate are completely happy with their decision.” -Augustina Ursino, Journalist with VacTruth.com.  Highly informative interview with Augustina.

Source: Bright Future

 

The Mysterious Origin of the Wuhan Coronavirus | The Epoch Times

CHINA-HEALTH-VIRUSIt has been two months since the outbreak of the coronavirus in Wuhan and its spread has shown no signs of slowing down in China. More than 35 Chinese cities have been put on lockdown by Chinese authorities in an attempt to isolate confirmed and suspected cases. The lives of millions of people are in danger as the virus shows signs of spreading further in China as well as internationally.

There are significant gaps in the official investigations into the origins of the novel Coronavirus. In order to contain the virus, one first needs to understand how a virus that allegedly originated in animals found its way to humans. For this to happen, the Chinese authorities need to release their animal testing data and samples. Testing results from animal samples collected at epicenters would give important insights into what animals might serve as intermediate hosts for the new coronavirus.

This is critical to the containment of the epidemic. For example, if rats are the intermediate hosts for this virus, it would be futile to shut down the cities to restrict people’s movements while infected rats are still moving freely. Results from animal samples could also guide policy decisions that would reduce the risk of another outbreak.

An Animal Origin of the Virus

Scientific studies based on phylogenetic analysis have researched the sequence of the novel coronavirus, compared it to other coronavirus sequences, and found it likely originated in bats. Researchers from the Wuhan Institute of Virology found the genome in the virus found in patients was 96 percent identical to that of an existing bat coronavirus, according to a study published in the journal Nature. But there have been other theories as well. One Chinese study suggested, for example, that snakes were the source of transmission to humans. However, many scientists believe that reptiles are a less likely source and that mammals like rats and pigs, and some birds, have been the primary reservoir for coronaviruses.

With this in mind, phylogenetic studies of viral genome sequences need to be supported by animal studies to confirm the origin of the infection, as well as to determine whether there is an intermediate host.

It is not an easy task for a virus to establish zoonotic transmission, and coronaviruses rarely leap from animal to human infection with high transmissibility. There is even less chance to see a coronavirus leap directly from bats to humans. To infect new hosts, mutations need to occur with the viral surface proteins and/or envelope and structural genes, so that the mutated viruses can bind and enter the cells of new species, and efficiently complete the replication cycles in the new hosts.

Some scientists have argued that coronaviruses can jump directly to humans, without mutating or passing through an intermediate species. However, an intermediate host was clearly needed to establish zoonotic transmission to humans in the previous outbreaks of coronaviruses. Many studies suggested that the bat coronavirus jumped from its natural host bats to civets and then to humans during the 2003 SARS outbreak, and it jumped from bats to camels and then to humans for the MERS outbreak. So, civets and camels would serve as intermediate hosts for zoonotic transmission.

Because bats were not sold at the Huanan market in Wuhan—the epicenter of the infection—at the time of the outbreak, this suggests the existence of another intermediate animal host that may have transferred the virus to humans.

What is the most puzzling is that there have been no reports on the testing of animal samples collected in any epicenters in Wuhan, especially at the Huanan seafood market, to identify what animals might be the host or intermediate hosts of this novel Wuhan coronavirus.

Chinese scientists published a report in Lancet recently which stated that “the majority of the earliest cases included reported exposure to the Huanan Seafood Wholesale Market” and that patients could have been infected through zoonotic or environmental exposures. Another report on Lancet by Chinese CDC scientists claimed that “on the basis of current data, it seems likely that the 2019-nCoV causing the Wuhan outbreak might also be initially hosted by bats, and might have been transmitted to humans via currently unknown wild animal(s) sold at the Huanan seafood market.”

However, so far, no information was released about the amount, and species, of wild animals present at the Huanan seafood market upon closure; nor about how the animals were managed or disposed of when the market was closed on Jan. 1, 2020. And no information was released about how many animal samples were tested for SARS-CoV or Wuhan Coronavirus via viral nucleic acid testing methods.

Official Chinese state news agency Xinhua reported on Jan. 26 that 33 samples out of 585 environmental samples collected at the Huanan Seafood market were positive for nucleic acids from new Coronavirus, suggesting the virus originated from wild animals or stocks sold there. However, these samples were from the environment—not from animals.

It would be an ultimate failure of the Wuhan public health commission and Chinese CDC if no animal samples were collected and tested prior to, or at the time of, the shutting-down of the Huanan seafood market, where many animals were sold at the time of the outbreak. It would be similar to conducting an investigation on a food-borne disease outbreak without taking restaurant food samples related to the outbreak, and instead taking dining table surface swabs to test.

Background of the Huanan Seafood Market Closure

The 2019-nCoV has caused rapid infection in China and spread to other countries outside China, which has led to a global health crisis.

The Huanan seafood market is known to be a major outlet for the collection and distribution of live and dead wild animals. These included live wolves, hedgehogs, deer, birds, snakes, goats, hares, and boars that were sold and available in the east section of the seafood market.

A Wuhan medical and health committee identified multiple pneumonia cases associated with Huanan seafood market, which were announced on Dec. 31, 2019. The seafood market was closedby the Wuhan government on Jan. 1.

Chinese medical reporters visited the market on Dec. 31, 2019, the evening before its closure on Jan.1 where they observed poor hygiene, and wild animal bodies and organs disposed of in an unorganized manner. This suggested that a relatively large quantity of wild animals were still present at the market upon the forced closure.

No Information on Wild Animals at the Seafood Market Was Disclosed

Yet, no information was released about the amount, and species, of animals present upon closure, how many animals were tested for Coronavirus, and how the animals were managed or disposed of upon the closure of the market on Jan. 1. A Chinese media outlet, Yicai, inquired about the outcome of the wild animals sold at the market and confirmed that there was no disclosure from the Wuhan government.

Dr. Guan Yi, the current director (China affairs) of the State Key Laboratory for Emerging Infectious Diseases at the University of Hong Kong, visited Wuhan on Jan. 21 with the goal of identifying the animal source. He mentioned in a media interview that locals refused to cooperate with him. He pointed out that with the market now closed, it would be difficult to investigate the origin of the virus. He said the “Huanan seafood market was cleaned after the closure, ‘the crime scene’ was gone, and how can you solve a case without evidence?”

Gao Fu, director of the Chinese Center for Disease Control and Prevention stated, “it is clear that the source of infection was from wild animals, but we don’t know which species due to closure of the seafood market.”

The Huge Risks of Not Identifying the Original or Intermediate Animal Hosts

The U.S. Center for Disease Control (CDC) stated that “much is unknown about how 2019-nCoV, a new coronavirus, spreads.” So far the understanding is that the major pathway of 2019-nCoV infection is respiratory droplet transmission and contact from humans to humans.

Guan Yi and Kwok-yung Yuen of the University of Hong Kong (HKU) et. al. identified severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus (SARS-CoV) from caged palm civets from live animal markets in China in 2003. Their studies lead to the subsequent ban on selling civets and the closing of all wild animal markets in Guangdong and helped to confine the SARS epidemic.

Typically, if an animal is identified as host or source of spread of disease, authorities and the CDC would initiate prevention and control measures such as an awareness campaign, proper quarantine of sick animals and disposal of carcasses as well as monitoring the potential route for how the disease spread zoonotically.

Rodents are known to infest seafood markets. For example, tens of thousands of rodents are expected to be unleashed in Japan as one big fish market is closed.

Huanan seafood market is also infested by rodents. If rodents were elucidated as being a potential host for coronavirus, the risk of rats infesting beyond the current quarantine zone still persists. Given the fact that coronavirus was detected from feces from patients from Shenzhen and that bat SARS-like virus strains were isolated from bat feces, the possible fecal-oral route of 2019-nCoV transmission in addition to respiratory droplet transmission would lead to a reasonable warning for people to avoid contact with animals like rats. Thus, if rodents are indeed a source or host of the 2019-NCoV infection, then, rodent contamination of food or water is a potential way for the disease to spread, which needs to be brought to the awareness of the international community.

Similarly, if birds or other species were the hosts of 2019-nCoV in the seafood market, the information pertaining to the species, amount, virus type, biological reactions, and potential routes of spreading of the virus also need to be identified or reported to the world so that appropriate prevention measures could be taken.

It would be serious incompetence and malfeasance if Chinese authorities did not attempt to collect nasal, fecal, and blood samples from animals and birds sold at the seafood market. Testing animal samples would reveal very important information regarding the zoonotic transmission routes, the trends of viral mutations in this outbreak, and the loopholes in the current countermeasures.

Were There Other Epicenters Besides the Huanan Seafood Market?

The Chinese CDC did release data from environmental samples from the seafood market and suggested that “it is originated from wild animals with species uncertain.”

A team which included Dr. Feng from the Chinese CDC published a report titled “Early Transmission Dynamics in Wuhan, China, of Novel Coronavirus-Infected Pneumonia,” in the New England Journal of Medicine on Jan. 29, 2020. The paper stated that “Although the majority of the earliest cases were linked to the Huanan Seafood Wholesale Market and the patients could have been infected through zoonotic or environmental exposures…the majority of the earliest cases included reported exposure to the Huanan Seafood Wholesale Market, but there was an exponential increase in the number of nonlinked cases beginning in late December.”

The Possibility 2019-nCoV Originated From Bat SARS-Like Virus (Bat-SL-CoV)

One recent Lancet report on Jan. 29, 2020, titled “Genomic characterisation and epidemiology of 2019 novel coronavirus: implications for virus origins and receptor binding,” stated that “A Blast search of the complete genomes of 2019-nCoV revealed that the most closely related viruses available on GenBank were bat-SL-CoV-ZC45 (sequence identity 87.99%; query coverage 99%) and another SARS-like betacoronavirus of bat origin, bat-SL-CoV-ZXC21 (accession number MG772934;23 87.23%;” “Notably, the 2019-nCoV strains were less genetically similar to SARS-CoV (about 79%) and MERS-CoV (about 50%).”

This message might be interpreted as 2019-nCoV being biologically closer related to SARS-like betacoronavirus of Bat origin and bats may be the original host of this virus. However, the authors did not claim that the only host to 2019-nCoV is a bat.

The paper stated that “However, despite the importance of bats, several facts suggest that another animal is acting as an intermediate host between bats and humans. First, the outbreak was first reported in late December, 2019, when most bat species in Wuhan are hibernating. Second, no bats were sold or found at the Huanan seafood market, whereas various non-aquatic animals (including mammals) were available for purchase. Third, the sequence identity between 2019-nCoV and its close relatives bat-SL-CoVZC45and bat-SL-CoVZXC21 was less than 90%, which is reflected in the relatively long branch between them. Hence, bat-SL-CoVZC45 and bat-SL-CoVZXC21 are not direct ancestors of 2019-nCoV. Fourth, in both SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV, bats acted as the natural reservoir, with another animal (masked palm civet for SARS-CoV35 and dromedary camels for MERS-CoV) acting as an intermediate host, with humans as terminal hosts. Therefore, on the basis of current data, it seems likely that the 2019-nCoV causing the Wuhan outbreak might also be initially hosted by bats, and might have been transmitted to humans via currently unknown wild animal(s) sold at the Huanan seafood market.”

They mentioned that most bats in Wuhan are hibernating and no bats are sold at the Huanan seafood market. Thus, the chance of physical contact from bats to spread the virus to humans or animals at Wuhan is highly unlikely.

Studies From Wuhan Institute of Virology on Bat SARS-Like CoV.

Zheng-Li Shi and several other researchers at the Wuhan Institute of Virology published an article in Nature in 2013 titled “Isolation and characterization of a bat SARS-like coronavirus that uses the ACE2 receptor.”

In that study, their team harvested from anal swabs or fecal samples from bats and found 2 strains of sequences from Bat SARS-Like CoVthat termed as RsSHC014 and Rs3367. They process 95% nucleotide sequence identity with human SARS-CoV Tor2 strain.

Isolation of a new bat virus in a study published in the Journal of Virology on Dec. 30, 2015, titled “Isolation and Characterization of a Novel Bat Coronavirus Closely Related to the Direct Progenitor of Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus,” found that the virus, named SL-CoV-WIV1, was almost identical to Rs3367 with 99.9% genome sequence identity. The researchers identified that WIV1 can use human ACE2 as an entry receptor and has the potential to infect human cells in this study. Subsequently, the same research group isolated another bat virus that can use ACE2 and infect human cell lines in the lab in 2015.

In addition, Dr. Shi’s group conducted another study in 2018 to address the question of whether some bat viruses can infect humans via using human ACE2, without the need of an intermediate host. But to the date of their study, “no direct transmission of SARS-Like CoVs from bats to people has been reported”.

They collected serum from 218 residents who live close to bat caves with bats carrying the viruses. Those caves were the places where the Shi group collected the virus samples. Then ELISA assays were conducted to detect antibodies to bat SARS-CoV, since antibody existence would suggest a prior exposure to the bat coronavirus. They found that only 6 out of 218 (2.7 %) subjects showed seropositivity, which suggested likely infections to bat SARS-CoVs or related viruses. No clinical symptoms have been manifested in the 6 positive persons in the past 12 months. As a control, they collected 240 samples from random blood donors in Wuhan, 1000 km away from Yunnan, none of the Wuhan blood samples showed any positivity to bat SARS-like CoV.

This data suggests that the chance of bat virus infecting humans is very low, <2.9% if possible, and with no obvious symptoms in human beings that live very close to the bat caves. No infection from a bat to a human has been reported in Wuhan as of 2018.

Track Record of Wuhan Institute of Virology on Engineering ‘Gain-of-Function’ Bat SARS-Like CoV.

Zhengli Shi’s group at the Institute of Virology at Wuhan was successful in isolating two infectious clones of bat SARS-Like CoV: SL-CoV-WIV1 and WIV16 from bats. In their further studies, they found out that these SL-CoV Spike protein (S protein) “[were] unable to use any of the three ACE2 molecules as its receptor; Second, the SL-CoV failed to enter cells expressing the bat ACE2; Third, the chimeric S covering the previously defined receptor-binding domain gained its ability to enter cells via human ACE2, albeit with different efficiencies for different constructs; Fourth, a minimal insert region ( Amino acids 310 to 518 ) was found to be sufficient to convert the SL-CoV S from non-ACE2 binding to human ACE2 binding.”

Therefore, Shi’s group found in a study published in the Journal of Virology in February 2008 that the natural bat coronavirus cannot use the human ACE2 receptor to infect humans. However, when inserted with some amino acids from position 310 to 518 for the bat CoV S protein sequence, the chimeric bat CoV can use the human ACE2 receptor.

Meanwhile, another research group led by Dr. Li published their finding in 2013 that 5 amino acid sites on CoV spike proteins are crucial in making the binding to human ACE2 on SARS virus (those positions are Y442, L472, N479, D480, T487). These 5 sites just lie in the region that the Shi group noted to be important above.

Later, Li and Shi jointly conducted a gain-of-function study published in the Journal of Virology in September 2015 on the MERS virus and a bat virus (strain HKU4) in 2015. Since MERS virus can enter human cells but HKU4 can not, they introduced 2 single mutations in the HKU4 spike protein and found that the new mutant S protein can enable HKU4 to enter human cells. If they mutated 2 sites in MERS spike, the resulting MERS pseudovirus (experimental virus) cannot enter human cells anymore.

Furthermore, Shi’s group joined an international group to generate a chimeric virus with the bat virus SHC014 they harvested in Yunnan. Since they know SHC014 is unlikely to bind to human ACE2, they “synthesized the SHC014 spike in the context of the replication competent, mouse-adapted SARS-CoV backbone”. So, that is a lab-engineered virus with SARS-CoV Mouse adapted backbone (MA15) but with SHC014 spike.

To their surprise, the chimeric virus (SHC014-MA15) can use SHC014 spike to bind to human ACE2 receptor and enter human cells. SHC014-MA15 can also cause disease in mice and cause death as well. Existing vaccines to SARS cannot protect animals from SHC014-MA15 infection. Therefore, these chimeric virus studies can lead to the generation of more pathogenic, more deadly CoV strains in mammalian models.

Due to the U.S. government-mandated pause on the gain-of-function (GOF) studies, this international research did not proceed further at that time. However, there is no evidence that Shi’s group in China stopped any further study on the track of introducing GOF mutations on the CoV. And it is clear that Shi’s group already mastered the reverse-engineering technology that is sufficient to introduce mutation in current SARS-CoV or SARS-Like CoV to create mutant infectious coronavirus.

Interestingly, Shi’s group published on bioRxiv on Jan. 23, 2020 that a new bat coronavirus that they detected in Yunnan, named BatCov RaTG13, shares 96.2 percent overall genome sequence identity with 2019-nCoV. However, this virus was never mentioned or published in their research before.

In the sequence information provided by them in the supplemental material and method section, 3 sequences are shared between the 2019-nCoV they collected and the RATG13 virus but not in any of the other SARS or Bat SARS-Like CoV families in the paper listed. The 3 sequences are located close to N terminus of the spike protein, they are GTNGTKR, NNKSWM, RSYLTPGD.

Possibilities of an Animal Host of 2019-nCoV at Huanan Seafood Market 

One recent Lancet paper titled “Genomic characterisation and epidemiology of 2019 novel coronavirus: implications for virus origins and receptor binding,” reported that “as a typical RNA virus, the average evolutionary rate for coronaviruses is roughly 10⁴nucleotide substitutions per site per year, with mutations arising during every replication cycle. It is, therefore, striking that the sequences of 2019-nCoV from different patients described here were almost identical, with greater than 99.9% sequence identity. This finding suggests that 2019-nCoV originated from one source within a very short period and was detected relatively rapidly.”

With mutations in every cycle, it is highly unlikely for different bats to host viruses with the same sequence. If bats alone are not enough for virus transmission, another animal is needed as the intermediate host, and the chance of the virus being identical is even slimmer. Since the seafood market is not the only source for the outbreak, it is reasonable to postulate that if another animal is the intermediate host for the virus, that animal needs to have contact with bats, allow bat coronavirus to proliferate in them, and, eventually, the animal needs to have the capacity to transmit viruses to human beings who may or may not have contact with the Huanan seafood market.

Therefore, there have been serious questions on whether this Wuhan coronavirus outbreak was due to a leak or mishandling of laboratory animals used in coronavirus studies. This is a reasonable public inquiry regarding the source of the outbreak and it warrants a transparent investigation from the Chinese authorities and foreign disease control and laboratory operation experts. This is not just about the accountability of medical ethics or laboratory safety operations, it is directly related to the current endeavors to contain the virus outbreak.

While the animal host of 2019-nCoV is yet to be identified, the data and information from possible animal hosts and potential zoonic infection is imperative for prevention and controlling disease on an international scale.

The Huanan seafood market has a high potential of harboring the animal host. Animal data and profiling results from the Huanan seafood market need to be disclosed immediately by Chinese authorities even if they are negative results. It is imperative for U.S. CDC and WHO officers to demand that Chinese authorities release the information about animal testing data.

If Chinese authorities refuse to disclose testing data for animal samples, it could imply an intentional cover-up of the true origin of the 2019-nCoV outbreak.

Source: The Epoch Times

Lessons From Leprosy For Coronavirus: Quarantine And Isolation Can Backfire | NPR

ap_5202240353_custom-411110ad4e887291bb9734e508582927c20cc275-s1400-c85Hundreds of people returning to the U.S. from Wuhan, China face mandatory two-week quarantines. And in China, the government is rounding up those who show signs of the deadly coronavirus, to be confined in massive quarantine centers.

Protecting public health is a delicate balance between the rights and freedom of individuals and the safety of society. But past efforts to isolate disease show that such moves — as well-intentioned as they might be — don’t always go as planned. And perhaps offer a cautionary lesson.

When my husband’s grandfather was diagnosed with leprosy in Connecticut in 1922, the first thing he did was run away. He packed his things that night and left his family and business behind to move to New York. It was the only state at the time that did not require those with this much-feared infectious disease to be sent to a remote hospital in Carville, La., and confined. By hiding from authorities, he could keep his freedom and presumably go on with his life.

He was not the only one to respond this way. When the U.S. government decided to establish a national leprosarium in 1917, it determined that the best way to contain the bacteria that caused leprosy was to segregate those infected. Since there was no cure at the time, that usually meant confinement for life. Patients were torn from their families and friends. They lost their freedom, as well as their livelihoods, civil rights and the respect of their fellow man. Women who gave birth at the hospital had their babies taken away.

Such dire consequences drove many who suspected, or knew, they had leprosy to conceal it from authorities. They avoided seeking medical assistance and failed to take steps to protect the people they loved from the remote possibility that they too might contract what we now know is a barely contagious disease.

When the federal government sought to identify all the leprosy cases in the country in the early 1900s, it found only 278. But public health investigators told Congress there likely were many more in hiding out of fear. The same year that my husband’s grandfather fled to New York, the assistant surgeon general announced that there were “1,200 lepers at large” in the country. He wanted Congress to give him the authority to round them up.

It turns out that the government’s solution was counterproductive. Instead of containing the disease, it only perpetuated it by discouraging treatment and the search for a cure. In the process, thousands of lives were disrupted and destroyed.

The current effort to contain the coronavirus differs in many ways from what happened to leprosy patients in the last century. Americans who might have been exposed to the virus in China will be quarantined for 14 days, not condemned to a lifetime of isolation. Medical treatment is much improved, and the chance for recovery is good. Still, coronavirus is much more contagious than leprosy, from which 95% of humans are naturally immune. Precautions certainly make sense.

But this latest outbreak raises similar questions to those health authorities grappled with decades ago. Are quarantines and isolation the most effective way to contain a disease? Do they make people more reluctant to identify themselves as potential victims?

“It backfires because people head for the hills,” Wendy Parmet, a professor of health law policy at Northeastern University told NPR’s Rob Stein. “People don’t call and seek health care… And health care providers become fearful of treating patients because they don’t want to get caught up in the quarantine.”

There are other questions too.

Will the U.S. decision to shut its borders to foreigners who have recently visited China do more harm than good? The World Health Organization thinks such travel bans might and has warned against any moves that instill panic and fear.

Perhaps more important, how will those believed to be potential carriers of the virus be treated by those around them? NPR’s Maria Godoy reports that some Asian Americans are already feeling some blowback. One student said she was told to leave a coffee shop and “take the coronavirus with her.”

When Americans feared a potential leprosy pandemic in the late 1800s, people of Asian descent were also unjustly stigmatized. A top Louisiana health official warned — falsely — that Chinese laundrymen were spreading the “loathsome” disease by spitting on their customer’s laundry before it was ironed. A racist labor leader, Denis Kearney, paraded a Chinese man with leprosy through the streets of San Francisco to make his case that “moon-eyed lepers” were a threat to the nation.

Throughout history, those believed to have leprosy, now called Hansen’s disease, were among the most reviled members of society, outcasts sometimes believed to be sinners who brought the illness upon themselves. Even today, the threat of leprosy is used to demonize immigrants and people living in homeless encampments as potential carriers of the disease — although there’s no evidence that’s true.

About 200,000 people around the world are diagnosed each year with Hansen’s disease. Many of them still prefer not to make their diagnosis public for fear of how they’ll be treated by the rest of society. Many delay seeking treatment even though the disease can be quickly cured with antibiotics. Those delays can lead to serious, lifelong disabilities, including the loss of limbs. It turns out that the stigma is still much more dangerous than the disease.

My husband’s grandfather was soon joined in New York City by his wife and children. He lived there for thirteen years before he got so sick that he was taken to the Carville leprosy hospital, the only place in the country that treated the disease. He died there three years later, in 1938. But it was decades before the truth came out. His wife and children were so afraid of the stigma of leprosy and how people would react, they kept his illness a secret for more than 60 years.

Source: NPR

Scenes from Wuhan’s Makeshift Hospitals for Coronavirus Patients: Like a ‘Death Camp’ | The Epoch Times

TOPSHOT-CHINA-HEALTH-VIRUS

Johnny Liberty, Editor’s Note: We were travelling in the southern island of Thailand when the Wuhan Coronavirus outbreak was first reported and noticed some of the impacts first-hand. This is a serious crisis. To avoid flying home through China, we rerouted our return flights through Australia and New Zealand.

“There is no medicine, no medical staff, no hot water, very limited food, no heating, unstable electricity… Please help us!” said one patient who was being confined at a makeshift hospital in Wuhan, where the coronavirus first broke out. In a Feb. 6 video posted onto social media, the patient can be heard saying, “This in fact is a death camp!”

Since Feb. 5, the Wuhan government began sending coronavirus patients with mild or moderate symptoms to these makeshift hospitals—called “fangcang” facilities in Chinese—which have been set up in over a dozen stadiums, school gyms, and exhibition centers across the city.

Since the policy was put in place, more and more patients published videos capturing the scenes at these facilities, where there is a lack of treatment and unsanitary conditions.

Some are on the edge of a mental breakdown, and began to destroy furniture out of frustration and anger. Some even began fighting with each other.

Manager Tells the Truth

In another widely circulated Feb. 6 video, a man introduces himself as the manager of a makeshift hospital.

“I’m the person in charge of this place,” he says to a group of patients and their relatives. “In fact, I can tell you, this is only a quarantine place, not a hospital. No one will take responsibility if something bad happens.”

A relative asks him, “If my mom needs an injection, who can help her?” The manager replies, “We can’t resolve such needs because we don’t have medical equipment.”

One patient asks, “What will happen after I finish my medicine?” The manager answered,  “You have to tell your relatives and ask them to bring the medicine here and hand it to the medical staff here. They will then bring the medicine to you.”

The manager repeatedly explained the situation thusly: “We have some medical staff, but we don’t have any medical devices. We can’t treat the patients… You need to stay here calmly and be quarantined.”

In the end, the manager told the patients: “The key point is that you can’t leave here after you’ve entered. Sending you here is to prevent infections [to healthy people]… Relatives, please don’t enter.”

Patients Plead for Help

On Feb. 6 early morning, an elderly patient posted a video where she asks for help. She said that around midnight, she was transferred to a makeshift facility set up inside the Hongshan Stadium.

“Here, there is no bathroom, no medicine, no hot water, no place to wash hands. The only restroom is located outside, which is more than 200 meters [656 feet] away from the building. It’s raining heavily right now,” she said.

“I thought I could receive good treatment after entering a hospital. But the result is just the opposite,” she complained. “Here, it’s full of patients like me. Some have more severe symptoms than me. We must have cross-infected each other.”

The lady said hundreds of patients are staying inside the stadium. Some don’t have a bed and are forced to sleep on a mattress placed on the floor.

“Please save us!” the woman cried.

A Wuhan netizen posted photos that her mother took at the Wuhan International Conference and Exhibition Center, which was converted to accommodate hospital beds. The bathrooms strewn with garbage, as no one is cleaning the facility, the netizen wrote in her post.

She added that the exhibition center was very cold; the roughly one thousand patients inside did not have enough clothes and blankets to warm themselves. The electricity also shut down, so patients couldn’t charge their devices.

In another video, patients can be heard coughing heavily, while others could not stand straight. But there were no medical staff who attended to them.

In yet another shared on Feb. 6, an elderly woman is seen kicking chairs and crying for medicine. The video post said the woman became angry because there were no basic supplies and medical staff.

The 2019 Novel Coronavirus (2019-nCov) first broke out in Wuhan, located in central China’s Hubei Province, in early December 2019. Tens of thousands have been infected within China, while dozens of countries are also reporting cases.

Source: The Epoch Times

Chinese Netizens and Expert Suspect Wuhan Bioresearch Lab Is the Source of the Coronavirus | The Epoch Times

Volunteers in protective suits disinfect a railway station as the country is hit by an outbreak of the new coronavirus, in ChangshaWhen virologists and medical experts around the globe discussed the suspicious nature of the novel coronavirus and pointed to Wuhan’s P4 lab as a likely source, netizens inside China were watching. A Chinese scholar recently challenged Wuhan’s P4 lab to explain how the proteins of the novel coronavirus seem to have been precisely engineered to enable the virus to bind onto human cells. He also disclosed unethical and unprofessional practices he previously observed in China’s bioresearch labs.

According to Wuhan-based Yangtze Daily, Shi Zhengli, Deputy Director of Wuhan’s P4 Lab, publicized a statement on Feb. 2 saying: “I pledge with my life that the 2019 novel coronavirus has nothing to do with our lab. This virus is a punishment imposed on mankind from nature, to condemn mankind’s uncivilized way of living. Those of you who believe rumors or so-called scientific analysis by unqualified researchers, I advise you to shut your damn mouths!”

Shi’s statement irritated many Chinese netizens. “For such a huge calamity that may take countless lives, give us facts and evidence, not pretentious statements such as pledging with your life,” one netizen commented.

A social media user named Wu Xiaohua, with a Ph.D. in biological related fields according to his WeChat profile, challenged Shi to answer key questions about the suspicious gene mutations found in the new virus.

Wu pointed out there is no way that these mutations are the outcome of natural recombination.

“Now, many scientists, including Shi herself, believe that this virus must have originated from bats, and would involve one or two virus hosts to explain the gene mutations. Based on current scientific publications, the virus must jump from rats to primates before it can infect humans. Then how is this step—from rats to primates—usually achieved? It can only be done in a research lab by scientists inserting a certain protein from primates into rats,” Wu wrote.

“I have personally performed the same type of genetic engineering experiments. You cannot get away by being cavalier. Do you dare to accept the challenge and give us an explanation?” he asked.

Wu also disclosed that some biolabs in China are very poorly regulated.

“For instance, some researchers in these labs kept the laboratory dogs as pets; some disposed of animal carcasses casually because following the biosafety rules and cremating them costs a lot of money. Some cut up the laboratory pigs and took the meat home to eat. I know this happened at Beijing 301 Hospital’s spine surgery lab. Worst of all, some laboratory animals were sold to wet markets as wild-caught animals for profit,” he wrote.

Xu Bo, a well-known IT magnate and billionaire in China, cited reports and articles to support Wu’s statements.

In his blog, Xu cited a news report about a lawsuit against biologist Li Ning.

Li is an academician of China Engineering Academy, and a former professor at China Agricultural University. The judgment in Li’s case, which came out on Jan. 2 this year, stated that between 2008 and 2012, Li’s lab sold experimental pigs, cows, and milk to local markets. These animal and animal products were bought using research funds; but Li and his fellow colleagues pocketed the money, a total of 10,179,201 yuan ($1,460,304), from the sale of these animals and animal products.

Li was sentenced to 12 years in prison for embezzlement.

According to a 2016 report from the China Experimental Animal Information Network, Chinese researchers use tens of millions of laboratory animals every year. The Experimental Animal Research Center of Hubei Province alone handles about 300,000 animals a year, either for bioresearch experiments inside the center, or to be sold and distributed to other labs in Hubei Province.

Xu and many other Chinese netizens say they suspect that the novel coronavirus is a genetically engineered virus that somehow escaped from Wuhan P4 Biosafety lab.

A P4 lab handles level 4 biosafety pathogens, the highest level and most dangerous, which have high fatality rates and no known treatments, such as, the ebola and SARS viruses. Such a lab must follow the highest microbiological safety standards to ensure the safety of researchers and the public.

The P4 lab in Wuhan is not only the first of its kind in China, but also the first in Asia. When it opened in 2017, U.S. scientists expressed concerns that, considering China’s opaque administrative structure, if one of those killer viruses “escaped” from the lab, it could cause a doomsday disaster.

Source: The Epoch Times

Why You Can’t Trust the FDA, the WHO, the CDC, the AAP, Merck, GlaxoSmithKline, Sanofi or Pfizer | Duluth Reader

NotAboutHealthBy Gary G. Kohls, M.D.

“The FDA receives 45% of its annual budget from the pharmaceutical industry. The World Health Organization (WHO) gets roughly 50% of its budget from private sources, including Big Pharma and its allied foundations. And the CDC, frankly, is a vaccine company; it owns 56 vaccine patents and buys and (very profitably) distributes $4.6 billion in vaccines annually through the Vaccines for Children program, which represents over 40% of its total budget.” — Robert F. Kennedy, Jr  

“The American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) derives a majority of its outside contributions – estimated at more than $25 million per year – from pharmaceutical companies that make vaccines. The pediatricians that the AAP represents derive the majority of their annual revenues from the administration of vaccines to their pediatric patients.) — J.B. Handley  

“Perhaps the most infamous example of corruption at the CDC is how the head of the CDC from 2002 to 2009, Julie Gerberding, left her government job to become president of Merck’s $5 billion dollar/year Vaccine Division. Merck’s CEO understandably described Gerberding as an “ideal choice”. She held that position until 2014 and currently holds the Merck job title of “Executive Vice President & Chief Patent Officer, Strategic Communications, Global Public Policy and Population Health”. That is to say, the former CDC director is now in charge of Merck’s propaganda efforts. One might say she’s basically doing the same job now that she did for the CDC, but even more lucratively. Apart from her salary, in 2015, Gerberding sold shares of Merck worth over $2.3 million. While at the CDC Gerberding shepherded Merck’s highly controversial and highly profitable Gardasil vaccine through the regulatory maize” — From http://www.collective-evolution.com  

“The majority of studies that authorities point to as (contrived) proof that vaccines do not cause autism have been published in a journal called Pediatrics, the official journal of the AAP. As we know, the AAP is a trade union for pediatricians.” – J.B. Handley   “Since vaccines are liability-free – and effectively compulsory to a captive market of 76 million children – there is meager market incentive for companies to make them safe. The public must rely on the moral scruples of Merck, GlaxoSmithKline, Sanofi, and Pfizer. But these companies have a long history of operating recklessly and dishonestly, even with (the many drug) products for which they can be sued for injuries. The four companies that make virtually all of the recommended vaccines are all convicted felons.  Collectively they have paid over $35 billion since 2009 for defrauding regulators, lying to and bribing government officials and physicians, falsifying science, and leaving a trail of (incurable chronic illnesses) injuries and deaths from products they knew to be dangerous and still sold under pretense of safety and efficacy.” – Robert F. Kennedy, Jr  

“I ate breakfast last week with the president of a network news division at CBS, and he told me that during non-election years, 70% of the advertising revenues for his news division come from pharmaceutical ads.  And if you go on TV any night and watch the network news, you’ll see they become just a vehicle for selling pharmaceuticals. He also told me that he would fire a host who brought onto his station a guest who lost him a pharmaceutical account.” — Robert F. Kennedy Jr  “Fewer than 1% of vaccine adverse events are reported. The CDC’s entire vaccination propaganda campaign rests on their claim that side effects from vaccination are exceedingly rare, but according to the blatantly pro-over-vaccination, and Big Pharma-funded CDC, in 2016 alone, the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) received 59,117 vaccine adverse event reports. Among those reports were 432 vaccine-related deaths, 1,091 permanent vaccine-related disabilities, 4,132 vaccine-related hospitalizations, and 10,274 vaccine-related emergency room visits. What if these numbers actually represent less than 1% of the total as this report asserts? You multiply those numbers by 100.” – William Christenson  

Please study immediately below the following quotes about the Human Papilloma Virus (HPV) vaccine Gardasil, which Merck’s propaganda/lobbying department has very successfully marketed, even acquiring fast-track status from the FDA that eliminated the need for long-term safety or efficacy studies.

Gardasil has been heavily marketed even prior to its FDA-approval in 2006 (for the Gardasil-4 vaccine – and again in 2014 for the Gardasil-9 vaccine) for the theoretical prevention of cancer of the cervix for young healthy adolescent females 30 – 40 years into the future that will require periodic vaccination booster shots that contain aluminum adjuvants for life – the exact frequency of which has yet to be determined, since the long-term efficacy and safety studies haven’t been performed!!

Incidentally, the following vaccines contain aluminum:  

“Anthrax, DT, DTaP (Infanrix), DTaP-IPV, DTaP-HepB-IPV (Pediarix), DTaP –IPV/Hib, Hep A, Hep B, HepA/Hep B (Twinrix), HIB (PedvaxHIB), HPV (Gardasil and Cervarix), Japanese encephalitis, MenB (Bexsero), Pneumococcal (Prevnar 13), Td, TDaP.”  

The following few quotes about the unacknowledged dangers of any aluminum-saturated vaccine (which applies to both HPV vaccines, including GlaxoSmithKline’s (Cervarix, approved by the FDA in 2009) come from Canadian research physician Dr Lucija Tomljenovic.   These important quotes were excerpted from Dr Tomljenovic’s alarming medical journal article that revealed the histologic findings of the cerebral vasculitis (toxic inflammation of the blood vessels in the brain) from two previously healthy young women following their deaths after their routine Gardasil vaccinations: https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/2206/800bfd13e511f433af71cabb8bef431cb913.pdf 

Here are more important quotes: “Gardasil is a recombinant vaccine and contains virus-like particles (VLPs) of HPV types 6, 11, 16, and 18 as active substances…The VLPs are adsorbed on amorphous aluminum hydroxyphosphate sulfate (AAHP) adjuvant nanoparticles. Animal models show that aluminum adjuvant nanoparticles are taken up by monocytes after injection, translocate to lymph nodes, then travel across the blood-brain barrier and eventually accumulate in the brain where they can cause significant immune-inflammatory adverse reactions. Thus, the presence of VLP particles in cerebral vasculature in the brain tissue specimens from young women who have died following vaccination with Gardasil may be explained by a “Trojan horse” mechanism that is dependent on circulating macrophages by which these particles adsorbed to aluminum adjuvant to gain access to brain tissue.”  

“Circulating immune complexes can result from either

  1. normal responses to infection,
  2. tissue injury or
  3. artificial responses to vaccination.

The fact that vaccines are designed to hyper-stimulate antibody production (thus producing much higher antibody levels than what occurs following natural infection), suggests that vaccination may carry a much higher risk for immune vasculopathies (and other autoimmune disorders). Gardasil injections induce sustained antibody titers (for HPV-16) that are more than 10-fold higher than natural HPV infection titers.”  

“Vaccine-induced cerebral vasculitis is a serious disease which typically results in fatal outcomes when undiagnosed and left untreated. The fact that many of the symptoms reported to vaccine safety surveillance databases following HPV vaccination are indicative of cerebral vasculitis, but are unrecognized as such (i.e., intense persistent migraines, syncope, seizures, tremors, tingling, myalgia, locomotor abnormalities, psychotic symptoms and cognitive deficits, etc), is a serious concern…It thus appears that in some cases vaccination may be the triggering factor of fatal autoimmune/neurological events. Physicians should be aware of this association.” – Dr Lucija Tomljenovic  

And here is what widely-published Canadian researcher Dr Christopher Shaw has to say about aluminum adjuvants in vaccines:  

“…our current results are consistent with the existing evidence on the toxicology and pharmacokinetics of Aluminum adjuvants which altogether strongly implicate these compounds as contributors to the rising prevalence of neurobehavioral disorders in children. Given that autism has devastating consequences in a life of a child, and that currently in the developed world over 1% of children suffer from some form of Autism Spectrum Disorder, it would seem wise to make efforts towards reducing infant exposure to aluminum from vaccines.“ — C A Shaw, PhD  

“There is a serious problem with vaccine safety. Vaccine aluminum adjuvant has adverse neurological effects, at dosages that are recommended by the US CDC. Vaccine critics are supported by the science. Parents refusing to vaccinate according to the recommended CDC schedule are supported by the science. Use aluminum-containing vaccines with great caution, or not at all.” – Chris Shaw, PhD

http://vaccinepapers.org/category/aluminum/  

And here is what Dr Christopher Exeley, the world-renowned British aluminum toxicologist reported recently about Alzheimers Disease (widely reported to be of “unknown origin”) which seems to affect mostly fully-vaccinated, fully-drugged older people:  

“We have made the first ever measurements of aluminium in brain tissue from 12 donors diagnosed with…Alzheimer’s disease. The concentrations of aluminium were extremely high, for example, there were values in excess of 10 μg/g tissue dry wt. in 5 of the 12 individuals. Overall, the concentrations were higher than all previous measurements of brain aluminium except cases of known aluminium-induced encephalopathy.” – Dr Christopher Exeley

Scandalously, for the volunteer patients that were included in the seven separate pre-clinical studies that Merck researchers performed, the researchers did NOT do any questioning of any of the study participants beyond 15 days after each of the series of 3 intramuscular vaccinations had been completed!! Therefore no safety studies beyond the exceedingly short-term were done and thus the “vaccine/industrial complex” has no justification in insisting that Gardasil is safe!!

Scandalously, the study participants were actually not questioned, but were simply told to fill out Vaccine Report Cards (VRCs) and send them in at 15 days following the most recent of the 3 injections!!

Scandalously, 5 of the 7 clinical trials used an aluminum adjuvant – instead of a saline control – as a “placebo”!!

Scandalously, only one of the 7 studies was properly controlled with a true saline placebo.

Scandalously, the seventh trial was totally uncontrolled!!

Scandalously, the seven groups of active vs. “placebo” were lumped together in the study’s conclusions, which made adequate interpretation of efficacy essentially impossible!!

Scandalously, the so-called “placebo” that was used in the vast majority of the trials was the known neurotoxin, Amorphous Aluminum Hydroxyphosphate Sulfate (AAHS), which was the very same adjuvant that was – and still is – in the active Gardasil shot!!

Scandalously, aluminum-containing AAHS, the highly neurotoxic and autoimmunity-inducing adjuvant, is in many other childhood and adult vaccines and is known to accumulate in the body with each injection!!

Scandalously, no mention was made by Merck that aluminum was in the so-called “placebo” shots until page 12 of the 28-page product information insert – and the amount of aluminum was only mentioned once!!

Scandalously, the participants that did not complete the entire series of 3 vaccinations were dropped from the final tabulations, meaning that those who died or had any of the most serious adverse outcomes (the reason for dropping out) were not included in the final statistics, deceptively minimizing negative outcomes!!

Scandalously, any trial drop-outs that died, had a stroke, developed seizure disorders, had a heart attack or had other serious adverse outcomes such as one of the many autoimmune disorders were not listed in the literature or product inserts if the victim did not receive all three shots!!

The following information is taken directly from Merck’s Gardasil product insert that accompanies each vial of vaccine and is to be made available to prospective patients before they give their consent:

The High Incidence of Headaches Following the Gardasil Vaccine Experiment is Likely Due to the Aluminum Adjuvant

The incidence of new-onset headaches in this healthy, previously headache-free population, for example, was the most commonly-reported systemic adverse reaction – with an incidence of 28% in both active and “placebo” treatment groups!!

(Note that Gardasil recipients experienced an incidence of > 28.2% and the aluminum-adjuvanted [AAHS] “placebo controls” had a headache incidence of > 28.4%!!)

This high incidence of serious headaches was highly likely a sign of cerebral vasculitis, which could then cause many of the other adverse effects commonly seen in these previously well patients including chronic fatigue syndrome, seizure disorders, narcolepsy, psychological illnesses or death!!

Among the causes of death listed in the product insert from 2010, there was printed the following Gardasil-associated deaths among the scrupulously-screened, exceptionally healthy study participants that completed the series of 3 shots: 2 deaths from sepsis,

  • 1 death from pancreatic cancer,
  • 1 fatal arrhythmia,
  • 1 death from pulmonary tuberculosis, 1 death from hyperthyroidism,
  • 1 death from post-operative pulmonary embolism and acute renal failure,
  • 1 death from cardiac arrest and resultant traumatic brain injury, 1 death from systemic lupus erythematosus,
  • 1 death because of a stroke,
  • 1 death from breast cancer, and 1 death from nasopharyngeal cancer.
  • In the AAHS/aluminum adjuvant-containing, alleged “placebo” group there was reported: 1 death from “asphyxia”,
  • 1 death from acute lymphocytic leukemia,
  • 1 death from “chemical poisoning” and
  • 1 death from myocardial infarction.
  • Significantly, zero deaths occurred in the true saline placebo group.

Fully-informed Consent to Potentially-Risky Medical Treatments Used to be a Part of Medical Ethics

The following Patient Counseling Information comes from the FDA-approved, Merck-generated 2010 Product Information Insert that licensed health practitioners (or the individuals delegated by them to inject the Gardasil) were advised to inform prospective vaccinees (or their parents or guardians) prior to proceeding with the potentially-dangerous, possibly even less-than-useless Gardasil vaccination protocol. (No Gardasil recipient has yet lived long enough to know if the vaccine will have actually prevented cervical cancer!)

It is highly likely that Merck’s legal advice below is not being followed by the vast majority of America’s medical professionals, whose clinics are profiting heavily by promoting Gardasil vaccinations (HPV vaccines are the most expensive vaccines in the history of the world) for their previously healthy adolescent female patients, who won’t know if it was worth all the shots and costs and risks of chronic illnesses until their reach their mid-40s – the peak age at which the diagnosis of cancer of the uterine cervix is made.

No matter, for patients harmed or killed by ANY vaccine – whether or not they were warned about adverse effects – cannot sue vaccine manufacturers, marketers or the vaccine-injecting medical profession for injuries or deaths. Scandalous!!

Most of the following excerpts are verbatim quotes from the product insert:

PATIENT COUNSELING INFORMATION for Gardasil Vaccinations

  1. Vaccination does not eliminate the necessity for women to continue to undergo recommended cervical cancer screening.
  2. Women who receive GARDASIL should continue to undergo cervical cancer screening per standard of care.
  3. Recipients of GARDASIL should not discontinue anal cancer screening if it has been recommended by a health care provider.
  4. GARDASIL has NOT been demonstrated to provide protection against disease from vaccine and non-vaccine HPV types to which a person has previously been exposed through sexual activity.
  5. Since syncope (fainting) has been reported following vaccination sometimes resulting in falling with injury, observation for 15 minutes after administration is recommended.
  6. Vaccine information is required to be given with each vaccination to the patient, parent, or guardian.
  7. Information regarding benefits and risks associated with vaccination.
  8. GARDASIL is not recommended for use in pregnant women.
  9. Importance of completing the immunization series unless contraindicated.
  10. Report any adverse reactions to their health care provider

The remainder of this article contains information that was obtained directly from the Gardasil package insert (and sometimes paraphrased from what was printed there). I have also bolded, enlarged and/or italicized some of the words or phrases to point out and/or emphasize the not-so-subtle, frequent obfuscation of data that the FDA allowed Merck to publish, data which likely was designed to distort (or at least put a positive spin on) the information – for both patients and physicians:   5.1 Syncope Because vaccinees may develop syncope (fainting shortly after a Gardasil shot), sometimes resulting in injury, observation for 15 minutes after administration is recommended. Syncope, sometimes associated with tonic-clonic movements and other seizure-like activity, has been reported following vaccination with GARDASIL   When syncope is associated with tonic-clonic movements (tonic/clonic movements ARE SEIZURES!!), the activity is usuallytransient and typically responds to restoring cerebral perfusion by maintaining a supine or Trendelenburg position.

Some vaccine victims died, some had strokes, some had heart attacks, some developed chronic epilepsy, some developed chronic fatigue syndrome, etc.

Table 5: Common Systemic Adverse Reactions in Girls and Women 9 Through 26 Years of Age

(GARDASIL ≥ Control) Adverse Reactions (1 to 15 Days Postvaccination) GARDASIL (N = 5088) AAHS/aluminum adjuvant “placebo” (N = 3790)

Fever 13% with Gardasil; 11.2% with AAHS/Aluminum adjuvant “placebo”, Nausea 6.7% Gardasil; 6.5% Aluminum, Dizziness 4.0% Gardasil; 3.6% Aluminum Diarrhea 3.6% Gardasil; 3.5% Aluminum Vomiting 2.4% Gardasil; 1.9% Aluminum Cough 2.0% Gardasil; 1.5% Aluminum Toothache, Upper respiratory tract infection, Malaise, Arthralgia, Insomnia, Nasal congestion all had an incidence over 1.0%. Many other adverse effects that had an incidence of less than 1.0% were not listed.

6.1 Clinical Trials Experience Studies in Girls and Women (ages 9 Through 45) and Boys and Men (9 Through 26 Years of Age) 18,083 individuals were administered GARDASIL or aluminum/AAHS “placebo” or saline placebo on the day of enrollment, and approximately 2 and 6 months thereafter, and safety was evaluated using Vaccination Report Cards (VRC) for 14 days after each injection.   The individuals that were monitored using the Vaccination Report Cards included 10,088 individuals 9 through 45 years of age at enrollment who received GARDASIL and 7,995 individuals who received the aluminum “placebo” or the saline true placebo.

99.8% of trial participants continued to the end of the 6-month trial despite many of them suffering significant adverse effects from both the vaccine and the aluminum adjuvant.

Table 9: Summary of Girls and Women 9 Through 26 Years of Age Who Reported an Incident Condition Potentially Indicative of a Systemic Autoimmune Disorder After Enrollment in Clinical Trials   (Recall that Aluminum adjuvants have a long history of causing autoimmune disorders.   It should be required for everybody to read and understand the extensive scholarly literature that had led to the identification of the ASIA Syndrome = “Autoimmune/Inflammatory Syndrome Induced by Adjuvants” at: https://autoimmunity-network.com/media/moxie/files/a/ad/adm/admin/The%20autoimmune-inflammatory%20syndrome%20induced%20by%20adjuvants.pdf

Note: Patients with the vaccine-induced ASIA Syndrome commonly present with post-vaccination symptoms such as chronic fatigue syndrome, cognitive impairment, arthralgias, myalgias, fevers, dry eyes and dry mouth, symptoms that are totally compatible with the ASIA Syndrome and are now found to occur following Gardasil vaccinations. Included are some of these disorders:  

1.     Arthralgia/Arthritis/Arthropathy   120 Gardasil-injected volunteers reported arthropathic signs and symptoms that were compatible with autoimmune arthropathies (and the ASIA Syndrome).  98 aluminum-adjuvanted “control group” members also reported arthropathies.

2.     There were 10 cases of Insulin Dependent Diabetes Mellitus (a known autoimmune disorder) in the Gardasil group and there were 6 cases of IDDM among the aluminum-adjuvant group.

3.     Also occurring among these previously totally healthy groups of young women were cases of these autoimmune, ASIA disorders:   Autoimmune Thyroiditis, Celiac Disease, Erythema Nodosum, Hyperthyroidism, Hypothyroidism, Inflammatory Bowel Disease, Multiple Sclerosis, Nephritis, Optic Neuritis, Pigmentation Disorder, Psoriasis, Raynaud’s Phenomenon, Rheumatoid Arthritis, Scleroderma/Morphea, Stevens-Johnson Syndrome, Systemic Lupus Erythematosus, Uveitis.

6.2 Post-marketing Experience The following adverse events have been spontaneously reported during post-approval use of GARDASIL. Because these events were reported voluntarily (unsolicited) from a population of uncertain size, it is not possible to reliably estimate their frequency or to establish a causal relationship to vaccine exposure.

Blood and lymphatic system disorders: Autoimmune hemolytic anemia, Idiopathic (autoimmune) thrombocytopenic purpura, Lymphadenopathy. Respiratory, thoracic and mediastinal disorders: Pulmonary embolus. Gastrointestinal disorders: Nausea, Pancreatitis, Vomiting.

General disorders and administration site conditions: Asthenia, Chills, Death, Fatigue, Malaise. Immune system disorders: Autoimmune diseases, Hypersensitivity reactions including anaphylactic/anaphylactoid reactions, Bronchospasm/Asthma, and Urticaria. Musculoskeletal and connective tissue disorders: Arthralgia, Myalgia. Nervous system disorders: Acute disseminated encephalomyelitis, Dizziness, Guillain-Barré syndrome, Headache, Lower motor neuron disease, Paralysis, Seizures, Syncope (including syncope associated with tonic/clonic movements and other seizure-like activity) sometimes resulting in falling with injury, Transverse myelitis.

Infections and infestations: Cellulitis. Vascular disorders: Deep venous thrombosis   GARDASIL is not indicated for women 27 years of age or older.   However, safety data in women 16 through 45 years of age was collected, and 3819 women (GARDASIL N = 1894 vs. AAHS control (aluminum adjuvant) or saline placebo N = 1925) reported at least 1 pregnancy each.   The overall proportions of pregnancies that resulted in an adverse outcome, defined as the combined numbers of: Spontaneous abortion, Late fetal death, and Congenital anomalies (45 cases in Gardasil vaccinees and 34 cases in aluminum-adjuvanted “placebo cases)out of the total number of pregnancy outcomes for which an outcome was known (and excluding elective terminations), were 22.6% (446/1973) in women who received GARDASIL and 23.1% (460/1994) in women who received AAHS control or saline placebo. Overall, 55 and 65 women in the group that received GARDASIL or AAHS control or saline placebo, respectively (2.9% and 3.4% of all women who reported a pregnancy in the respective vaccination groups), experienced a serious adverse reaction during pregnancy.

There were 45 cases of congenital anomaly in pregnancies that occurred in women who received GARDASIL and 34 cases of congenital anomaly in pregnancies that occurred in women who received AAHS control or saline placebo.   Further sub-analyses were conducted to evaluate pregnancies with estimated onset within 30 days or more than 30 days from administration of a dose of GARDASIL or AAHS control or saline placebo. For pregnancies with estimated onset within 30 days of vaccination, 5 cases of congenital anomaly were observed in the group that received GARDASIL compared to 1 case of congenital anomaly in the group that received AAHS control or saline placebo.

The congenital anomalies seen in (Gardasil-affected) pregnancies with estimated onset within 30 days of vaccination included

Pyloric stenosis, Congenital megacolon, Congenital hydronephrosis, Hip dysplasia, and Club foot.  

Conversely, in pregnancies with onset more than 30 days following vaccination, 40 cases of congenital anomaly were observed in the group that received GARDASIL compared with 33 cases of congenital anomaly in the group that received AAHS (aluminum!) “control” or saline placebo.

GARDASIL or AAHS control were given to a total of 1133 (breast-feeding) women (vaccine N = 582, AAHS control N = 551) during the relevant Phase 3 clinical studies.

Overall, 27 and 13 infants of women who received GARDASIL or AAHS control, respectively (representing 4.6% and 2.4% of the total number of women who were breast-feeding during the period in which they received GARDASIL or AAHS control, respectively), experienced a serious adverse reaction.   In a post-hoc analysis of clinical studies, a higher number of breast-feeding infants (n = 7) whose mothers received GARDASIL had acute respiratory illnesses within 30 days post vaccination of the mother as compared to infants (n = 2) whose mothers received AAHS control.

11. DESCRIPTION GARDASIL, Human Papillomavirus Quadrivalent (Types 6, 11, 16, and 18) Vaccine, Recombinant, is a non-infectious recombinant quadrivalent vaccine prepared from the purified virus-like particles (VLPs) of the major capsid (L1) protein of HPV Types 6, 11, 16, and 18. The L1 proteins are produced by separate fermentations in recombinant Saccharomyces cerevisiae and self-assembled into VLPs.

The fermentation process involves growth of S. cerevisiae on chemically-defined fermentation media which include vitamins, amino acids, mineral salts, and carbohydrates. The VLPs are released from the yeast cells by cell disruption and purified by a series of chemical and physical methods.

The purified Virus-Like Particles are adsorbed on pre-formed aluminum-containing adjuvant (Amorphous Aluminum Hydroxyphosphate Sulfate).

The quadrivalent HPV VLP vaccine is a sterile liquid suspension that is prepared by combining the adsorbed VLPs of each HPV type and additional amounts of the aluminum-containing adjuvant and the final purification buffer.   GARDASIL is a sterile suspension for intramuscular administration.

Each 0.5-mL dose contains approximately 20 mcg of HPV 6 L1 protein, 40 mcg of HPV 11 L1 protein, 40 mcg of HPV 16 L1 protein, and 20 mcg of HPV 18 L1 protein.  

Each 0.5-mL dose of the vaccine contains approximately 225 mcg of aluminum (as Amorphous Aluminum Hydroxyphosphate Sulfate adjuvant), 9.56 mg of sodium chloride, 0.78 mg of L-histidine, 50 mcg of polysorbate 80, 35 mcg of sodium borate.   And yet, despite the fact that there is no proof that Gardasil has prevented a single case of cervical cancer, the CDC website does not dare to discuss the details and personal stories of the thousands of young, previously health young women that experienced serious, even fatal, adverse effects both before the costly vaccine was marketed and after it was sanctioned by the CDC, the AAFP and the AAP.

Indeed, the CDC’s website (https://www.cdc.gov/vaccinesafety/pdf/data-summary-hpv-gardasil-vaccine-is-safe.pdf) reassuringly states, totally ignoring the warnings in the Gardasil product insert that medical ethicists say must be revealed to the patient or guardian prior to a vaccine injection or a drug prescription – per the age-old medical ethical standard of “fully informed consent”:

“The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, American Academy of Family Physicians, and American Academy of Pediatrics strongly recommend children receive all vaccines according to the recommended schedule.”  

Here is that CDC-recommended schedule that is now mandatory, no questions to be asked, in California: After studying it and trying to calculate exactly how much injected mercury, aluminum, live viruses and the various impurities that the schedule will deliver to any California child that wants to go to public school, it is important to ask any physician that orders their patients to comply with the CDC schedule (exactly as posted) any of the questions listed further below this 2018 schedule that contrasts the number of vaccinations from previous years. This totally accurate diagram is posted at: http://somehelpful.info/Science/Vaccination-Russian-roulette.html.    

After being enlightened about America’s mandated, obvious over-vaccination schedule, are there any Questions?

Such as:

  1. What might happen if my baby doesn’t take ALL of the vaccines?
  2. What might happen if I delay having my baby start the vaccine schedule until he/she has reached blood-brain barrier and immunological maturity?
  3. Why are the unvaccinated people that I know also the healthiest people, the ones with the fewest chronic illnesses, the ones that aren’t on cocktails of potentially toxic drugs, the ones with no autoimmune disorders and the ones that never catch the flu anyway?
  4. What if there is a mis-match between the influenza viruses that circulated in Australia during their flu season last year and the viral antigens that were chosen to be included in the current flu shot?
  5. What if I had an adverse reaction to a previous vaccine, should I still be vaccinated with that shot? (And what is the strength of the evidence for your recommendation that my baby stick to the CDC’s mandated schedule?)
  6. What if there is a family history of vaccine adverse effects?
  7. Why should I have my baby follow the CDC schedule when my autistic first baby had his first seizure, near-SIDS event and his first autistic symptoms immediately after a cocktail of vaccinations that was given at your clinic?
  8. Did your medical school only teach you about the benefits of vaccinations and not about the actual risks?
  9. Were your medical school professors actual practicing physicians or were they mainly academically-oriented and therefore with minimal practical experience in pediatric patient care?

And here are some enlightening and very useful quotes from Robert F. Kennedy, Jr, who knows more and is more articulate about vaccines and the dangers of over-vaccinating American children than 99% of US physicians and 99.9% of US politicians.  

“For American kids born in 1986, only 12.8% had chronic diseases (especially autoimmune disorders). That number has grown to 54% among the vaccine generation (those born after 1986) in lockstep with the expanding schedule.”  

“Safety testing, which typically requires months and years for other medical products, often lasts only a few days with vaccines – not nearly long enough to spot cancers or chronic conditions like autoimmune diseases (e.g., juvenile, insulin dependent diabetes mellitus, rheumatoid arthritis, lupus, multiple sclerosis), allergic illnesses (e.g., food allergies, allergic rhinitis, eczema, asthma), or neurological and neurodevelopmental injuries (e.g., ADD, ADHD, narcolepsy, seizure disorders, and the spectrum of autistic disorders). The vaccine inserts that accompany every vial of mandated vaccines include warnings about these and over 400 other injuries including many serious immune, neurological, and chronic illnesses for which FDA suspects that vaccines may be the cause.”   “Many of these illnesses became epidemic in American children after 1986, coterminous with the exploding vaccine schedule. For American kids born in 1986, only 12.8% had chronic diseases. That number has grown to 54% among the vaccine generation (those born after 1986) in lockstep with the expanding schedule.”  

“The children who comprise this vaccine-injured generation are now aging out of schools that needed to build quiet rooms and autism wings, install wobble chairs, hire security guards and hike special ed spending to 25% to accommodate them. They are landing on the social safety net which they threaten to sink. As lawmakers all around the nation vote to mandate more vaccines and call for the censorship of experts (including parents of vaccine-injured or killed children) that are expressing concerns about vaccine safety, Democratic Presidential candidates argue about how to fix America’s dysfunctional and unaffordable health care system without addressing the reality of the vaccine-related chronic disease and autoimmune disorder epidemic. The good news for Big Pharma, of course, is that many of these vaccine-injured children have lifelong dependencies on blockbuster drugs like insulin, Adderall, anti-psychotic drugs, Epi-Pens, asthma inhalers, and diabetes, arthritis, and anti-seizure meds made by the same companies that made the vaccines.”  

“An overwhelming majority of the FDA officials directly charged with licensing vaccines, and the CDC officials who effectively mandate them for children, have personal financial entanglements with vaccine manufacturers. These “public servants” are often shareholders in, grant recipients from, and/or paid consultants to vaccine manufacturers, and, occasionally, even patent holders of the very vaccines they vote to approve. Those conflicts of interest motivate them to recommend ever more vaccines with minimal support from evidence-based science” – Robert F. Kennedy, Jr.  

“The FDA receives 45% of its annual budget from the pharmaceutical industry. The World Health Organization (WHO) gets roughly half its budget from private sources, including Pharma and its allied foundations. And the CDC, frankly, is a vaccine company; it owns 56 vaccine patents   and buys and distributes $4.6 billion in vaccines annually through the Vaccines for Children program, which is over 40% of its total budget.” — Robert F. Kennedy, Jr  

“An overwhelming majority of the FDA officials directly charged with licensing vaccines, and the CDC officials who effectively mandate them for children, have personal financial entanglements with vaccine manufacturers. These “public servants” are often shareholders in, grant recipients from, and/or paid consultants to vaccine manufacturers, and, occasionally, even patent holders of the very vaccines they vote to approve. Those conflicts of interest motivate them to recommend ever more vaccines with minimal support from evidence-based science” – Robert F. Kennedy, Jr.  

“The FDA receives 45% of its annual budget from the pharmaceutical industry. The World Health Organization (WHO) gets roughly half its budget from private sources, including Pharma and its allied foundations. And the CDC, frankly, is a vaccine company; it owns 56 vaccine patents   and buys and distributes $4.6 billion in vaccines annually through the Vaccines for Children program, which is over 40% of its total budget.” — Robert F. Kennedy, Jr  

“The HHS (US Health and Human Services partners with vaccine makers to develop, approve, recommend, and pass mandates for new products and then shares profits from vaccine sales. HHS employees can personally collect up to $150,000 annually in royalties for products they work on. For example, key HHS officials collect money on every sale of Merck’s controversial HPV vaccine Gardasil, which also yields tens of millions annually for the agency in patent royalties.” — Robert F. Kennedy, Jr  

“In 1986, Congress—awash in Pharma money (the pharmaceutical industry is number one for both political campaign contributions and lobbying spending on legislators over the past 20 years) enacted a law granting vaccine makers blanket immunity from liability for injuries caused by vaccines. The subsequent gold rush by pharmaceutical companies boosted the number of recommended inoculations from twelve shots of five vaccines in 1986 to 54 shots of 13 vaccines today. A billion-dollar sideline grew into the $50 billion vaccine industry behemoth.” — Robert F. Kennedy, Jr  

“Since vaccines are liability-free – and effectively compulsory to a captive market of 76 million children – there is meager market incentive for companies to make them safe. The public must rely on the moral scruples of Merck, GlaxoSmithKline, Sanofi, and Pfizer. But these companies have a long history of operating recklessly and dishonestly, even with (the many non-vaccine) products that they must market to the public and for which they can be sued for injuries. The four companies that make virtually all of the recommended vaccines are all convicted felons.  Collectively they have paid over $35 billion since 2009 for defrauding regulators, lying to and bribing government officials and physicians, falsifying science, and leaving a trail of injuries and deaths from products they knew to be dangerous and still sold under pretense of safety and efficacy.” – Robert F. Kennedy, Jr

Addenda:

1)    The Health Resources Services Administration runs an under-advertised Vaccine Injury Compensation Program (VICP). Information on how to file a vaccine injury claim is available at (https://www.hrsa.gov/vaccine-compensation/data/index.html).

2)    Scandalously, even your neighborhood pharmacy has been given approval to have poorly trained, vaccinology-ignorant sales staff, who don’t know a deltoid muscle from a triceps, to inject the full-gamut of 13 adult vaccines into anybody who asks for one or more of them at the store!! One wonders: Are risks or contraindications even inquired about? Is the concept of fully informed consent understood by the pharmacy employees when potentially toxic medical procedures are offered? Since vaccine-makers and physician clinics and hospitals are free from liability, does that hold for pharmacies as well?

BIOGRAPHY

Dr. Gary G. Kohls is a retired rural family physician from Duluth, Minnesota who has written a weekly column for the Reader Weekly, Duluth’s alternative newsweekly magazine since his retirement in 2008. His column, titled Duty to Warn is re-published around the world.   Dr Kohls practiced holistic mental health care in Duluth for the last decade of his family practice career prior to his retirement in 2008, primarily helping patients who had become addicted to cocktails of psychiatric drugs to safely go through the complex withdrawal process. His column often deals with various unappreciated health issues, including those caused by Big Pharma’s over-drugging, Big Vaccine’s over-vaccinating, Big Medicine’s over-screening, over-diagnosing and over-treating agendas and Big Food’s malnourishing food industry. Those four sociopathic entities can combine to even more adversely affect the physical, mental, spiritual and economic health of the recipients of the vaccines, drugs, medical treatments and the eaters of the tasty and ubiquitous “FrankenFoods” – particularly when they are consumed in combinations, doses and potencies that have never been tested for safety or long-term effectiveness.

Dr Kohls’ Duty to Warn columns are archived at:
http://duluthreader.com/search?search_term=Duty+to+Warn&p=2;
http://www.globalresearch.ca/author/gary-g-kohls;
http://freepress.org/geographic-scope/national; https://www.lewrockwell.com/author/gary-g-kohls/; and https://www.transcend.org/tms/search/?q=gary+kohls+articles

Source: Duluth Reader

Congressman Confronts Zuckerberg About Censoring Information About Vaccine Safety | Collective Evolution

By

  • The Facts: Senator Bill Posey from Florida recently questioned Mark Zuckerberg during a hearing on Capitol Hill about Facebook’s censorship on information that paints vaccines in a negative light,
  • Reflect On: Why do proponents of vaccines always use terms like . “anti-vax conspiracy theories” and ridicule instead of simply addressing the points and facts that are made by vaccine safety advocates like Bill Posey?

Editor’s Note: The end of free speech on the internet continues here with deliberate censorship of other perspectives re: vaccines by Facebook, Google and Apple News and other “gatekeepers” of information (and disinformation comes along with the package). 

Mark Zuckerberg was recently confronted by Senator Bill Posey from Florida during a hearing on Capitol Hill about Facebook’s recent censorship on information about vaccine safety. Zuckerberg shared that they are simply conforming with the general scientific consensus, and do their best to censor information that may be harmful to people. This really shows his unawareness about vaccine safety, and he also used the term “anti-vaccine.” Furthermore, headlines are popping up within the mainstream once again reading “anti-vaccine conspiracy theories” and “vaccine misinformation.” This is a common tactic from the pharmaceutical controlled mainstream media, they always use these terms along with ridicule instead of addressing the concerns and points made by vaccine safety advocates. You can watch the Congressman and Zuckerberg’s exchange below, but first, I wanted to put a tidbit of information about why people are concerned about vaccines.

How safe are vaccines? More people are starting to realize that they are not as safe as they are marketed to be. This is why the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act has paid out approximately $4 billion to compensate families of vaccine injured children. As astronomical as the monetary awards are, they’re even more alarming considering HHS claims that only an estimated 1% of vaccine injuries are even reported to the Vaccine Adverse Events Reporting, System (VAERS). Think about that for a minute, If the numbers from VAERS and HHS are correct – only 1% of vaccine injuries are reported and only 1/3 of the petitions are compensated – then up to 99% of vaccine injuries go unreported and the families of the vast majority of people injured by vaccines are picking up the costs, once again, for vaccine makers’ flawed products.

2010 HHS pilot study by the Federal Agency for Health Care Research (AHCR) conducted by Harvard doctors/researchers found that 1 in every 39 vaccines causes injury, a shocking comparison to the claims from the CDC of 1 in every million. You can read more about that here.

If we look at the MMR vaccine, for example, there have ben 93,929 adverse events, 1,810 disabilities, 6,902 hospitalizations, and 463 deaths. Furthermore, it’s well documented that the measles vaccine has been a complete failure. This is evident by the documented outbreaks in highly vaccinated populations up to the present day. A study published as far back as 1994 in JAMA Internal Medicine makes this quite clear.

We found 18 reports of measles outbreaks in very highly immunized school populations where 71% to 99.8% of students were immunized against measles. Despite these high rates of immunization, 30% to 100% (mean, 77%) of all measles cases in these outbreaks occurred in previously immunized students. In our hypothetical school model, after more than 95% of schoolchildren are immunized against measles, the majority of measles cases occur in appropriately immunized children. (source)

During the measles outbreak in California in 2015, a large number of suspected cases occurred in recent vaccinees. Of the 194 measles virus sequences obtained in the United States in 2015, 73 were identified as vaccine sequences. The media (Pharma-owned) generated high public anxiety. This fear mongering led to the demonization of unvaccinated children, who were perceived as the spreaders of this disease, this type of fear mongering happens all the time, and Facebook has been apart of it.

There are a number of concerns with vaccines, the list is quite large. Vaccine ingredients is another big concern.

A study published in 2011 makes the issue quite clear:

Aluminum is an experimentally demonstrated neurotoxin and the most commonly used vaccine adjuvant. Despite almost 90 years of widespread use of aluminum adjuvants, medical science’s understanding about their mechanisms of action is still remarkably poor. There is also a concerning scarcity of data on toxicology and pharmacokinetics of these compounds. In spite of this, the notion that aluminum in vaccines is safe appears to be widely accepted. Experimental research, however, clearly shows that aluminum adjuvants have a potential to induce serious immunological disorders in humans. (source)

The key takeaway here is that “medical science’s understanding about their mechanisms of action is still remarkably poor.”

After this study, more research came out to help us better understand what happens when aluminum is injected into the body. It has been found that injected aluminum does not exit the body; in fact, it stays in the body and travels to various organs in the brain, where it remains. This isn’t surprising since it’s the adjuvant, it’s designed to stay there or else the vaccine doesn’t work.

As the groundbreaking study in 2015 emphasized:

Evidence that aluminum-coated particles phagocytozed in the injected muscle and its draining lymph nodes can disseminate within phagocytes throughout the body and slowly accumulate in the brain further suggests that alum safety should be evaluated in the long term.

Furthermore, in 2018, a paper published in the Journal of Inorganic Biochemistry found that almost 100 percent of the intramuscularly injected aluminum in mice as vaccine adjuvants was absorbed into the systemic circulation and traveled to different sites in the body such as the brain, the joints, and the spleen, where it accumulated and was retained for years post-vaccination. (source)

You can watch a video here of Dr. Christopher Exley, a Professor in Bioinorganic Chemistry at Keele University explains what happens to aluminum when it is injected via a vaccine.

The Takeaway

Regardless of how mainstream media outlets are presenting this part of the hearing, it’s great to see Zuckerberg questioned about Facebook’s censoring of information regarding vaccines. We here at Collective Evolution have experienced this censorship, along with other independent media outlets, we’ve been heavily censored, blocked, and demonetized. A clear strategic agenda by Facebook, and those who control it, to shut down information and viewpoints that do not fit within the accepted framework of the global elite.

Scientific American, The Oldest US Monthly Magazine, Issues Severe Warning on 5G | Waking Times

By Terence Newton

Editor’s Note: This is yet another tragic example of the unleashing of a new technology which has not been properly tested before deployment. Are these technology corporations so out of touch with their own humanity they do not consider the consequences beyond their own bottom line? 5G could very well be an end game for the human beings who cannot adapt to such high-levels of EMF in the environment and an extinction level event for many other creatures as well.

In a recently published article entitled, We Have No Reason to Believe 5G is Safe, Scientific American (SciAm) magazine issued a stern warning about the known and potential dangers of 5G technology.

Of particular significance is the fact that SciAm is the oldest continuously published monthly magazine in the United States, founded by inventor and publisher Rufus M. Porter in 1845, and running monthly since 1921. It is a highly influential publication, widely reputed for its rigorous scientific standards, and lauded by today’s fact-checkers as highly credible and staunchly pro-science.

In the article, University of California, Berkeley public health researcher Joel M. Moskowitz argues that 5G, along with previous w-fi and cellular technology, is much more harmful than the government and telecomm industry wants the public to believe.

READ: UN STAFFER WARNS THAT 5G IS A ‘WAR ON HUMANITY’

His primary concerns center around a recent FCC announcement, made in a press release, that the FCC is close to reaffirming the radio frequency radiation (RFR) exposure limits that were previously adopted by the commission in the 1990’s… well before the introduction of 5G, 4G, 3G, 2G or even WiFi.

In short, the safety standards that the FCC wishes to maintain are severely outdated and fail to reflect the growing body of scientific evidence demonstrating harm.

Moskowitz notes that the ’90’s exposure limits only address the singular concern over the potential effects of the intensity of exposure to RFR. With the research we now have available the health concerns are much broader, including a sincere risk of cancer, among other things.

READ: 5G NETWORK USES SAME EMF WAVES AS PENTAGON CROWD CONTROL SYSTEM

Moskowitz also cites the the International EMF Scientist Appeal, which elaborates on the now-known dangerous effects of RFR:

Moskowitz points out that,”the scientists who signed this appeal arguably constitute the majority of experts on the effects of nonionizing radiation. They have published more than 2,000 papers and letters on EMF in professional journals.” Inviting readers and policy makers to consider the weight of more than 500 peer-reviewed research studies finding, “harmful biologic or health effects from exposure to RFR at intensities too low to cause significant heating,” Moskowitz believes that more rigorous studies are necessary before the rollout goes forward.

READ: PROMINENT BIOCHEMISTRY PROFESSOR WARNS – 5G IS THE ‘STUPIDEST IDEA IN THE HISTORY OF THE WORLD’

In other words, the scientific jury is already out on the harmful effects of RFR, and the FCC is flat-out derelict in its duty to put public safety above telecomm industry interests.

Regarding the propaganda dimension of this debate, Moskowitz addresses the fact that industry spokepersons and related government officials frequently refer to contrarian viewpoints as ‘fear-mongering,’ pointing out that the current scientific research is legitimate, leaving the scientific community with a genuine responsibility to speak out about these concerns.

Final Thoughts

Cracks are showing in the government and telecom industry’s blanket assertion that 5G is safe, and many prominent and influential scientists, dignitaries, and organizations are now speaking out against 5G – the global human experiment without consent.  For the editorial board of Scientific American to run a piece this condemning 5G is a very strong signal that even the most mainstream elements of the scientific community are genuinely concerned.

Read more articles from Terence Newton.

Terence Newton is a staff writer for WakingTimes.com, interested primarily with issues related to science, the human mind, and human consciousness.

This article (Scientific American, the Oldest US Monthly Magazine, Issues Severe Warning on 5G) was originally created and published by Waking Times and is published here under a Creative Commons license with attribution to Terence Newton and WakingTimes.com. It may be re-posted freely with proper attribution, author bio, and this copyright statement. 

Source: Waking Times