Research

by

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

by

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.

by

We Have No Reason to Believe 5G is Safe | Scientific American

By Joel Moskovitz

Editor’s Note: Science is allegedly the foundation for sound reasoning when it comes to evaluating the short and long-term benefits (and drawbacks) of any new technology, but in the case of 5G there is no reliable science to assure us of its safety. Quite the contrary, it’s being deployed globally without concern for the safety of those exposed.

The telecommunications industry and their experts have accused many scientists who have researched the effects of cell phone radiation of “fear mongering” over the advent of wireless technology’s 5G. Since much of our research is publicly-funded, we believe it is our ethical responsibility to inform the public about what the peer-reviewed scientific literature tells us about the health risks from wireless radiation.

The chairman of the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) recently announced through a press release that the commission will soon reaffirm the radio frequency radiation (RFR) exposure limits that the FCC adopted in the late 1990s. These limits are based upon a behavioral change in rats exposed to microwave radiation and were designed to protect us from short-term heating risks due to RFR exposure.

Yet, since the FCC adopted these limits based largely on research from the 1980s, the preponderance of peer-reviewed research, more than 500 studies, have found harmful biologic or health effects from exposure to RFR at intensities too low to cause significant heating.

Citing this large body of research, more than 240 scientists who have published peer-reviewed research on the biologic and health effects of nonionizing electromagnetic fields (EMF) signed the International EMF Scientist Appeal, which calls for stronger exposure limits. The appeal makes the following assertions:

“Numerous recent scientific publications have shown that EMF affects living organisms at levels well below most international and national guidelines. Effects include increased cancer risk, cellular stress, increase in harmful free radicals, genetic damages, structural and functional changes of the reproductive system, learning and memory deficits, neurological disorders, and negative impacts on general well-being in humans. Damage goes well beyond the human race, as there is growing evidence of harmful effects to both plant and animal life.”

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.

The FCC’s RFR exposure limits regulate the intensity of exposure, taking into account the frequency of the carrier waves, but ignore the signaling properties of the RFR. Along with the patterning and duration of exposures, certain characteristics of the signal (e.g., pulsing, polarization)increase the biologic and health impacts of the exposure. New exposure limits are needed which account for these differential effects. Moreover, these limits should be based on a biological effect, not a change in a laboratory rat’s behavior.

The World Health Organization’s International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) classified RFR as “possibly carcinogenic to humans” in 2011. Last year, a $30 million study conducted by the U.S. National Toxicology Program (NTP) found “clear evidence” that two years of exposure to cell phone RFR increased cancer in male rats and damaged DNA in rats and mice of both sexes. The Ramazzini Institute in Italy replicated the key finding of the NTP using a different carrier frequency and much weaker exposure to cell phone radiation over the life of the rats.

Based upon the research published since 2011, including human and animal studies and mechanistic data, the IARC has recently prioritized RFR to be reviewed again in the next five years. Since many EMF scientists believe we now have sufficient evidence to consider RFR as either a probable or known human carcinogen, the IARC will likely upgrade the carcinogenic potential of RFR in the near future.

Nonetheless, without conducting a formal risk assessment or a systematic review of the research on RFR health effects, the FDA recently reaffirmed the FCC’s 1996 exposure limits in a letter to the FCC, stating that the agency had “concluded that no changes to the current standards are warranted at this time,” and that “NTP’s experimental findings should not be applied to human cell phone usage.” The letter stated that “the available scientific evidence to date does not support adverse health effects in humans due to exposures at or under the current limits.”

The latest cellular technology, 5G, will employ millimeter waves for the first time in addition to microwaves that have been in use for older cellular technologies, 2G through 4G. Given limited reach, 5G will require cell antennas every 100 to 200 meters, exposing many people to millimeter wave radiation. 5G also employs new technologies (e.g., active antennas capable of beam-forming; phased arrays; massive multiple inputs and outputs, known as massive MIMO) which pose unique challenges for measuring exposures.

Millimeter waves are mostly absorbed within a few millimeters of human skin and in the surface layers of the cornea. Short-term exposure can have adverse physiological effects in the peripheral nervous system, the immune system and the cardiovascular system. The research suggests that long-term exposure may pose health risks to the skin (e.g., melanoma), the eyes (e.g., ocular melanoma) and the testes (e.g., sterility).

Since 5G is a new technology, there is no research on health effects, so we are “flying blind” to quote a U.S. senator. However, we have considerable evidence about the harmful effects of 2G and 3G. Little is known the effects of exposure to 4G, a 10-year-old technology, because governments have been remiss in funding this research. Meanwhile, we are seeing increases in certain types of head and neck tumors in tumor registries, which may be at least partially attributable to the proliferation of cell phone radiation. These increases are consistent with results from case-control studies of tumor risk in heavy cell phone users.

5G will not replace 4G; it will accompany 4G for the near future and possibly over the long term. If there are synergistic effects from simultaneous exposures to multiple types of RFR, our overall risk of harm from RFR may increase substantially. Cancer is not the only risk as there is considerable evidence that RFR causes neurological disorders and reproductive harm, likely due to oxidative stress.

As a society, should we invest hundreds of billions of dollars deploying 5G, a cellular technology that requires the installation of 800,000 or more new cell antenna sites in the U.S. close to where we live, work and play?

Instead, we should support the recommendations of the 250 scientists and medical doctors who signed the 5G Appeal that calls for an immediate moratorium on the deployment of 5G and demand that our government fund the research needed to adopt biologically based exposure limits that protect our health and safety.

Joel M. Moskowitz

Joel M. Moskowitz, PhD, is director of the Center for Family and Community Health in the School of Public Health at the University of California, Berkeley. He has been translating and disseminating the research on wireless radiation health effects since 2009 after he and his colleagues published a review paper that found long-term cell phone users were at greater risk of brain tumors. His Electromagnetic Radiation Safety website has had more than two million page views since 2013. He is an unpaid advisor to the International EMF Scientist Appeal and Physicians for Safe Technology.

Source: Scientific American

by

US Vax Court Sees 400% Spike in Vaccine Injuries, Flu Shot Wins Top Honors for Biggest Payout | Vaccine Impact

Vaccine injury cases are on the rise people, so if you’ve got your head in the sand and you haven’t been paying attention, it’s time to wake up.

Here’s a little background for those of you just getting started.

Ronnie Reagan… almost 30 years ago to the day, the 40th president of the United States signed away the rights of Americans to sue vaccine makers, replacing them with a law that forces families who have suffered vaccine injury or death to sue the U.S. government instead of a pharmaceutical company.

As a result, special masters from the United States Special Claims Court, also known for our purposes as the vaccine court, are given full authority as judge with no jury to decide the fate of Americans who have had the unfortunate ‘luck’ to be stricken by a vaccine injury — which can range from chronic, mild symptoms to death.

Once a year, this non-traditional court provides the public with a glimpse into its inner workings, by issuing an annual report on its website — a ritual that happens every January.  The report is sent to the President of Congress, otherwise known as the Vice President of the United States, where it is intended to serve as a bell weather monitoring reactions the American public may be having to vaccinations that are increasingly becoming forced by government mandates around the country.

Great, right?  Accountability in action?

Wrong.

The report, which is consistently ignored by mainstream media/politicians/health officials and the CDC, lies dormant on the reports page of the U.S. Special Claims Court website.

No headlines, no press release, no analysis, no alert the media, no nothing.

No surprise, given that most people in America don’t even know that vaccines were ruled to be unavoidably unsafe by the U.S. Supreme Court in 2011.  Also no surprise, that mainstream, co-opted, globalist elite media constantly ignore this report, along with sane arguments made by health freedom advocates about the dangers and risks of vaccine injury (‘look! a unicorn!’), instead using terms like ‘the science is in,’ and vaccine risk has been ‘debunked,’ to deter rational discussion pertaining to evidence that is hiding in plain sight.

Also no surprise that the U.S. Special Claims Court offers up an ineffective, low tech, archaic version of the report every year.  Instead of a nice, sort-able spread sheet, the court posts a scanned PDF document — a format which requires labor-intensive activities to conduct any sort of concrete analysis.  One must either re-data-entry all 220+ pages which would take weeks, or conduct an extensive, hand-written breakdown by vaccine of each case, combined with extensive tallying and organization efforts in order to identify statistical relevance and trends emerging from the vaccine court.

Is this by design?  Perhaps.  Most definitely it is at the very least a deterrent from having anybody actually sit down and try to analyze the damn thing.

Which is exactly why we do it, every year since 2014.  Not to be deterred, it took us 10 months to finally finish our analysis of this year’s report.  But once we did, the trends we found were shocking — not just because of what they revealed about the continual increase in vaccine injury, but also because of the deafening silence present among the halls of mainstream media, as vaccine injury continues to be a subject that journalists and media outlets ignore — chalking it up to yet another conspiracy theory from yet another fake news site.

Well pull up a chair and hold on to your hats, because guess what we discovered:

  1. Vaccine court settlement payouts increased in total $91.2 million in 2015, up from $22.8 million in 2014 to $114 million in 2015 — a 400% increase. 
  2. Vaccine court settlement payments for flu shots increased the most, from $4.9 million in 2014 to $61 million in 2015 —  an increase of more than 1000%, despite autumnal onslaughts every year of media/pr/advertising campaigns urging Americans to ‘get your flu shot,’ with total abandon for the statistical facts coming out of the vaccine court.
  3. Varicella (chicken pox) had the third biggest increase — from $0 in 2014 to $5.8 million in 2015.  (No surprise shingles is on the rise among the elderly population, as recently vaccinated grandchildren continuously shed live virus to their unsuspecting elders.)
  4. Hepatitis B was the fourth largest increase in vaccine court settlements, increasing 321% in 2015 to more than $8 million in 2015 from $1.9 million in 2014.
  5. TDap/DTP/DPT and D/T shots were the fifth largest increase, leaping 75% in 2014 from $5.5 million to $9.8.

The rest of the settlements not pictured here are: Tetanus, $4 million; HPV $3.4 million, up from almost nothing in 2014 (one to watch in January when the 2016 report is issued); MMR, which actually decreased from the number one position last year to under $1 m — an 88%+ decrease in payouts; pertussis, $1.7 million; thimerisol $1.5 million; HIB, $345k, menginococal $500k, HEP A $408k, DPT & Polio, $210k & rotovirus $76k. 

You may have noticed we omitted the second place winner, ‘other.’  Here’s why.

‘Other’ illustrates perfectly the dodgy nature of the vaccine court report, and its lack of transparency in the vaccine court process.  Instead of identifying which combination of vaccines are being charged with injury or death and labeling the case accordingly, a special master can decide to label a vaccine case ‘other,’ thereby diluting its affect on the overall numbers in the final analysis.

In 2015, the ‘other’ category was the second largest increase in vaccine settlement payments, totaling $21.5 million in payouts, up 388% from $4.4 million in payouts the year before.

We’re not accusing anybody of anything.  But, 388% increase is a lot.  What combination of vaccines is causing such an increase?  Doesn’t the public have a right to know?  If the court decided, for example, that there were too many flu shot settlements mounting for the year, couldn’t it simply skew the data by categorizing certain cases as ‘other,’ which would artificially deflate the flu category?

Did we mention that these results are ONLY for the judgements — cases that are found in favor of the plaintiff.  It does NOT include the EXTENSIVE legal fees for both sides, which are paid for by the U.S. government whether the lawyer wins or loses the case?  Those are categorized as costs.  And instead of submitting them in the report along with any judgments that are awarded, often they are entered as separate entries, making the exercise of linking them with their judgement payouts that much harder, requiring yet another step in the arduous, analysis of data.

The total dollar payout of legal fees for the vaccine court in 2015 is $42 million.

Also, a hand full of settlements in the payout are based on annuities — that means that the payouts (many of which total more than $1 million) reoccur annually.  That’s because life as they knew it for some plaintiffs disappeared after their vaccine injury occurred, and the costs to care for them in perpetuity for the life of the plaintiff requires an annual sum that is often extensive.

Share far and wide people, it’s time to turn the tide.

Republished with permission of The Mom Street Journal. Read the full article at TheMomStreetJournal.com.

Source: Vaccine Impact & TheMomStreetJournal.com

by

Fake news is real — Artificial Intelligence is going to make it much worse | CNBC

“The Boy Who Cried Wolf” has long been a staple on nursery room shelves for a reason: It teaches kids that joking too much about a possible threat may turn people ignorant when the threat becomes an actual danger.

President Donald Trump has been warning about “fake news” throughout his entire political career putting a dark cloud over the journalism professional. And now the real wolf might be just around the corner that industry experts should be alarmed about.

The threat is called “deepfaking,” a product of AI and machine learning advancements that allows high-tech computers to produce completely false yet remarkably realistic videos depicting events that never happened or people saying things they never said. A viral video starring Jordan Peele and “Barack Obama” warned against this technology in 2018, but the message was not enough to keep Jim Carrey from starring in “The Shining” earlier this week.

The danger goes far beyond manipulating 1980s thrillers. Deepfake technology is allowing organizations that produce fake news to augment their “reporting” with seemingly legitimate videos, blurring the line between reality and fiction like never before — and placing the reputation of journalists and the media at greater risk.

Ben Zhao, a computer science professor at the University of Chicago, thinks the age of getting news on social media makes consumers very susceptible to this sort of manipulation.

“What the last couple years has shown is basically fake news is quite compelling even in [the] absence of actual proof. … So the bar is low,” Zhao said.

The bar to produce a convincing doctored video is lower than people might assume.

Earlier this year a clip purporting to show Democratic leader Nancy Pelosi slurring her words when speaking to the press was shared widely on social media, including at one point by Trump’s attorney Rudy Giuliani. However, closer inspection revealed that the video had been slowed to 75% of its normal speed to achieve this slurring effect, according to the Washington Post. Even with the real video now widely accessible, Hany Farid, a professor at UC Berkeley’s School of Information and a digital forensics expert, said he still regularly receives emails from people insisting the slowed video is the legitimate one.

“Even in these relatively simple cases, we are struggling to sort of set the record straight,” Farid said.

It would take a significant amount of expertise for a fake news outlet to produce a completely fabricated video of Oprah Winfrey endorsing Trump, but researchers say the technology is improving every day. At the University of Washington, computer vision researchers are developing this technology for positive, or at least benign, uses like making video conferencing more realistic and letting students talk to famous historical figures. But this research also leads to questions about potential dangers, as the attempts made by attackers are expected to continually improve.

How to detect a deepfake

To make one of these fake videos, computers digest thousands of still images of a subject to help researchers build a 3-D model of the person. This method has some limitations, according to Zhao, who noted the subjects in many deepfake videos today never blink, since almost all photographs are taken with a person’s eyes open.

However, Farid said these holes in the technology are being filled incredibly rapidly.

“If you asked me this question six months ago, I would’ve said, ‘Yeah, [the technology] is super cool, but there’s a lot of artifacts, and if you’re paying attention, you can probably tell that there’s something wrong,’” Farid said. “But I would say we are … quickly but surely getting to the point where the average person is going to have trouble distinguishing.”

In fact, Zhao said researchers believe the shortcomings that make deepfake videos look slightly off to the eye can readily be fixed with better technology and better hardware.

“The minute that someone says, ‘Here’s a research paper telling you about how to detect this kind of fake video,’ that is when the attackers look at the paper and say, ‘Thank you for pointing out my flaw. I will take that into account in my next-generation video, and I will go find enough input … so that the next generation of my video will not have the same problem,’” Zhao said.

“Once we live in an age where videos and images and audio can’t be trusted … well, then everything can be fake.” – Hany Farid, Professor at UC Berkeley’s School of Information

One of the more recent developments in this field is in generating speech for a video. To replicate a figure such as Trump’s voice, computers can now simply analyze hundreds of hours of him speaking. Then researchers can type out what they want Trump to say, and the computer will make it sound as if he actually said it. Facebook, Google and Microsoft have all more or less perfected this technology, according to Farid.

Manipulated videos of this sort aren’t exactly new — Forest Gump didn’t actually meet JFK, after all. However, Farid says this technology is hitting its stride, and that makes the danger new.

“To me the threat is not so much ‘Oh, there’s this new phenomenon called deepfakes,’” Farid said. “It’s the injection of that technology into an existing environment of mistrust, misinformation, social media, a highly polarized electorate, and now I think there’s a real sort of amplification factor because when you hear people say things, it raises the level of belief to a whole new level.”

The prospect of widespread availability of this technology is raising eyebrows, too. Tech-savvy hobbyists have long been using deepfakes to manufacture pornography, a consistent and comically predictable trend for new technology. But Zhao believes it is only a matter of time before the research-caliber technology gets packaged and released for mass-video manipulation in much broader contexts.

“At some point someone will basically take all these technologies and integrate and do the legwork to build a sort of fairly sophisticated single model, one-stop shop … and when that thing hits and becomes easily accessible to many, then I think you’ll see this becoming much more prevalent,” Zhao said. “And there’s nothing really stopping that right now.”

Facing a massive consumer trust issue

When this happens, the journalism industry is going to face a massive consumer trust issue, according to Zhao. He fears it will be hard for top-tier media outlets to distinguish a real video from a doctored one, let alone news consumers who haphazardly stumble across the video on Twitter.

“Once we live in an age where videos and images and audio can’t be trusted … well, then everything can be fake,” Farid said. “We can have different opinions, but we can’t have different facts. And I think that’s sort of the world we’re entering into when we can’t believe anything that we see.”

Zhao has spent a great deal of time speaking with prosecutors, judges — the legal profession is another sector where the implications are huge — reporters and other professors to get a sense for every nuance of the issue. However, despite his clear understanding of the danger deepfakes pose, he is still unsure of how news outlets will go about reacting to the threat.

“Certainly, I think what can happen is … there will be even less trust in sort of mainstream media, the main news outlets, legitimate journalists [that] sort of react and report real-time stories because there is a sense that anything that they have seen … could be in fact made up,” Zhao said.

Then it becomes a question of how the press deal with the disputes over reality.

“And if it’s someone’s word, an actual eyewitness’ word versus a video, which do you believe, and how do you as an organization go about verifying the authenticity or the illegitimacy of a particularly audio or video?” Zhao asked.

Defeating the deepfakes

Part of this solution may be found in the ledger technology that provides the digital infrastructure to support cryptocurrencies like bitcoin — the blockchain. Many industries are touting blockchain as a sort of technological Tylenol. Though few understand exactly how it works, many swear it will solve their problems.

Farid said companies like photo and video verification platform Truepic, to which he serves as an advisor, are using the blockchain to create and store digital signatures for authentically shot videos as they are being recorded, which makes them much easier to verify later. Both Zhao and Farid are hoping social platforms like Facebook and Twitter will then promote these videos that are verified as authentic over non-verified videos, helping to halt the spread of deepfakes.

“The person creating the fake always has the upper hand,” Farid said. “Playing defense is really, really hard. So I think in the end our goal is not to eliminate these things, but it’s to manage the threat.”

Until this happens, Zhao said the fight against genuinely fake news may not start on a ledger, but in stronger consumer awareness and journalists banding together to better verify sources through third parties.

“One of the hopes that I have for defeating this type of content is that people are just so inundated with news coverage and information about these types of videos that they become fundamentally much more skeptical about what a video means and they will look closer,” Zhao said. “There has to be that level of scrutiny by the consumer for us to have any chance of fighting back against this type of fake content.”

Nicholas Diakopoulos, assistant professor in Northwestern University’s School of Communication and expert on the future of journalism, said via email that the best solutions involve a mix of educational and sociotechnical advances.

“There are a variety of perceptual cues that can be tip-offs to a deepfake and we should be teaching those broadly to the public,” he said.

Diakopoulos has referenced Farid’s work on photo forensics among ideas outlined in an article he wrote for the Columbia Journalism Review last year. He also cited a research project called FaceForensics that uses machine learning to detect, with 98.1% accuracy, whether a video of a face is real. Another research technique under study: Blood flow in video of a person’s face can be analyzed in order to see if pixels periodically get redder when the heart pumps blood.

“On the sociotechnical side, we need to develop advanced forensics techniques that can help debunk synthesized media when put into the hands of trained professionals,” he told CNBC. “Rapid response teams of journalists should be trained and ready to use these tools during the 2020 elections so they can debunk disinformation as quickly as possible.”

Diakopoulos has studied the implications of deepfakes for the 2020 electionsspecifically. He also has written papers on how journalists need to think when “reporting in a machine reality.”

And he remains optimistic.

“If news organizations develop clear and transparent policies of their efforts using such tools to ensure the veracity of the content they publish, this should help buttress their trustworthiness. In an era when we can’t believe our eyes when we see something online, news organizations that are properly prepared, equipped and staffed are poised to become even more trusted sources of information.”

Source: CNBC

by

TheyRule.net

Check out the interconnections between Boards of Directors, Corporations, Institutions, etc. with this interesting website.

Source: TheyRule.net