Mycoplasma: The Linking Pathogen in Neurosystemic Diseases

Several strains of mycoplasma have been “engineered” to become more dangerous. They are now being blamed for AIDS, cancer, CFS, MS, CJD and other neurosystemic diseases.

By DONALD W. SCOTT MA, MSc | THE REAL AGENDA | FEBRUARY 13, 2013

There are 200 species of Mycoplasma. Most are innocuous and do no harm; only four or five are pathogenic. Mycoplasma fermentans (incognitus strain) probably comes from the nucleus of the Brucella bacterium. This disease agent is not a bacterium and not a virus; it is a mutated form of the Brucella bacterium, combined with a visna virus, from which the mycoplasma is extracted.

The pathogenic Mycoplasma used to be very innocuous, but biological warfare research conducted between 1942 and the present time has resulted in the creation of more deadly and infectious forms of Mycoplasma. Researchers extracted this mycoplasma from the Brucella bacterium and actually reduced the disease to a crystalline form. They “weaponised” it and tested it on an unsuspecting public in North America.

Dr Maurice Hilleman, chief virologist for the pharmaceutical company Merck Sharp & Dohme, stated that this disease agent is now carried by everybody in North America and possibly most people throughout the world.

Despite reporting flaws, there has clearly been an increased incidence of all the neuro/systemic degenerative diseases since World War II and especially since the 1970s with the arrival of previously unheard-of diseases like chronic fatigue syndrome and AIDS.

According to Dr Shyh-Ching Lo, senior researcher at The Armed Forces Institute of Pathology and one of America’s top mycoplasma researchers, this disease agent causes many illnesses including AIDS, cancer, chronic fatigue syndrome, Crohn’s colitis, Type I diabetes, multiple sclerosis, Parkinson’s disease, Wegener’s disease and collagen-vascular diseases such as rheumatoid arthritis and Alzheimer’s.

Dr Charles Engel, who is with the US National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland, stated the following at an NIH meeting on February 7, 2000: “I am now of the view that the probable cause of chronic fatigue syndrome and fibromyalgia is the mycoplasma…”

I have all the official documents to prove that mycoplasma is the disease agent in chronic fatigue syndrome/fibromyalgia as well as in AIDS, multiple sclerosis and many other illnesses. Of these, 80% are US or Canadian official government documents, and 20% are articles from peer-reviewed journals such as the Journal of the American Medical Association, New England Journal of Medicine and the Canadian Medical Association Journal. The journal articles and government documents complement each other.

How the Mycoplasma Works

The mycoplasma acts by entering into the individual cells of the body, depending upon your genetic predisposition.

You may develop neurological diseases if the pathogen destroys certain cells in your brain, or you may develop Crohn’s colitis if the pathogen invades and destroys cells in the lower bowel.

Once the mycoplasma gets into the cell, it can lie there doing nothing sometimes for 10, 20 or 30 years, but if a trauma occurs like an accident or a vaccination that doesn’t take, the mycoplasma can become triggered.

Because it is only the DNA particle of the bacterium, it doesn’t have any organelles to process its own nutrients, so it grows by uptaking pre-formed sterols from its host cell and it literally kills the cell; the cell ruptures and what is left gets dumped into the bloodstream.

II- CREATION OF THE MYCOPLASMA

A Laboratory-Made Disease Agent

Many doctors don’t know about this mycoplasma disease agent because it was developed by the US military in biological warfare experimentation and it was not made public. This pathogen was patented by the United States military and Dr Shyh-Ching Lo. I have a copy of the documented patent from the US Patent Office.(1)

All the countries at war were experimenting with biological weapons. In 1942, the governments of the United States, Canada and Britain entered into a secret agreement to create two types of biological weapons (one that would kill, and one that was disabling) for use in the war against Germany and Japan, who were also developing biological weapons. While they researched a number or disease pathogens, they primarily focused on the Brucella bacterium and began to weaponise it.

From its inception, the biowarfare program was characterised by continuing in-depth review and participation by the most eminent scientists, medical consultants, industrial experts and government officials, and it was classified Top Secret.

The US Public Health Service also closely followed the progress of biological warfare research and development from the very start of the program, and the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) and the National Institutes of Health (NIH) in the United States were working with the military in weaponising these diseases. These are diseases that have existed for thousands of years, but they have been weaponised—which means they’ve been made more contagious and more effective. And they are spreading.

The Special Virus Cancer Program, created by the CIA and NIH to develop a deadly pathogen for which humanity had no natural immunity (AIDS), was disguised as a war on cancer but was actually part of MKNAOMI.² Many members of the Senate and House of Representatives do not know what has been going on.  For example, the US Senate Committee on Government Reform had searched the archives in Washington and other places for the document titled “The Special Virus Cancer Program: Progress Report No. 8”, and couldn’t find it. Somehow they heard I had it, called me and asked me to mail it to them. Imagine: a retired schoolteacher being called by the United States Senate and asked for one of their secret documents! The US Senate, through the Government Reform Committee, is trying to stop this type of government research.

Crystalline Brucella

The title page of a genuine US Senate Study, declassified on February 24, 1977, shows that George Merck, of the pharmaceutical company, Merck Sharp & Dohme (which now makes cures for diseases that at one time it created), reported in 1946 to the US Secretary of War that his researchers had managed “for the first time” to “isolate the disease agent in crystalline form”.³

They had produced a crystalline bacterial toxin extracted from the Brucella bacterium. The bacterial toxin could be removed in crystalline form and stored, transported and deployed without deteriorating. It could be delivered by other vectors such as insects, aerosol or the food chain (in nature it is delivered within the bacterium). But the factor that is working in the Brucella is the mycoplasma.

Brucella is a disease agent that doesn’t kill people; it disables them. But, according to Dr Donald MacArthur of the Pentagon, appearing before a congressional committee in 1969,(4) researchers found that if they had mycoplasma at a certain strength—actually, 10 to the 10th power—it would develop into AIDS, and the person would die from it within a reasonable period of time because it could bypass the natural human defences.  If the strength was 10 to 8, the person would manifest with chronic fatigue syndrome or fibromyalgia. If it was l0 to 7, they would present as wasting; they wouldn’t die and they wouldn’t be disabled, but they would not be very interested in life; they would waste away.

Most of us have never heard of the disease brucellosis because it largely disappeared when they began pasteurising milk, which was the carrier. One salt shaker of the pure disease agent in a crystalline form could sicken the entire population of Canada. It is absolutely deadly, not so much in terms of killing the body but disabling it.

Because the crystalline disease agent goes into solution in the blood, ordinary blood and tissue tests will not reveal its presence. The mycoplasma will only crystallise at 8.1 pH, and the blood has a pH of 7.4 pH. So the doctor thinks your complaint is “all in your head”.

Crystalline Brucella and Multiple Sclerosis

In 1998 in Rochester, New York, I met a former military man, PFC Donald Bentley, who gave me a document and told me: “I was in the US Army, and I was trained in bacteriological warfare. We were handling a bomb filled with brucellosis, only it wasn’t brucellosis; it was a Brucella toxin in crystalline form. We were spraying it on the Chinese and North Koreans.”

He showed me his certificate listing his training in chemical, biological and radiological warfare. Then he showed me 16 pages of documents given to him by the US military when he was discharged from the service. They linked brucellosis with multiple sclerosis, and stated in one section: “Veterans with multiple sclerosis, a kind of creeping paralysis developing to a degree of 10% or more disability within two years after separation from active service, may be presumed to be service-connected for disability compensation. Compensation is payable to eligible veterans whose disabilities are due to service.” In other words: “If you become ill with multiple sclerosis, it is because you were handling this Brucella, and we will give you a pension. Don’t go raising any fuss about it.” In these documents, the government of the United States revealed evidence of the cause of multiple sclerosis, but they didn’t make it known to the public—or to your doctor.

In a 1949 report, Drs Kyger and Haden suggested “the possibility that multiple sclerosis might be a central nervous system manifestation of chronic brucellosis”. Testing approximately 113 MS patients, they found that almost 95% also tested positive for Brucella.(5)We have a document from a medical journal, which concludes that one out of 500 people who had brucellosis would develop what they call neurobrucellosis; in other words, brucellosis in the brain, where the Brucella settles in the lateral ventrides—where the disease multiple sclerosis is basically located.⁶

Contamination of Camp Detrick Lab Workers

A 1948 New England Journal of Medicine report titled “Acute Brucellosis Among Laboratory Workers” shows us how actively dangerous this agent is.⁷   The laboratory workers were from Camp Detrick, Frederick, Maryland, where they were developing biological weapons. Even though these workers had been vaccinated, wore rubberised suits and masks and worked through holes in the compartment, many of them came down with this awful disease because it is so absolutely and terrifyingly infectious.

The article was written by Lt Calderone Howell, Marine Corps Captain Edward Miller, Marine Corps, Lt Emily Kelly, United States Naval Reserve; and Captain Henry Bookman. They were all military personnel engaged in making the disease agent Brucella into a more effective biological weapon

III — COVERT TESTING OF MYCOPLASMA

Testing the Dispersal Methods

Documented evidence proves that the biological weapons they were developing were tested on the public in various communities without their knowledge or consent.

The government knew that crystalline Brucella would cause disease in humans. Now they needed to determine how it would spread and the best way to disperse it. They tested dispersal methods for Brucella suis and Brucella melitensis at Dugway Proving Ground, Utah, in June and September 1952. Probably, 100% of us now are infected with Brucella suis and Brucella melitensis.(8)

Another government document recommended the genesis of open-air vulnerability tests and covert research and development programs to be conducted by the Army and supported by the Central Intelligence Agency.

At that time, the Government of Canada was asked by the US Government to cooperate in testing weaponised Brucella, and Canada cooperated fully with the United States. The US Government wanted to determine whether mosquitoes would carry the disease and also if the air would carry it. A government report stated that “open-air testing of infectious biological agents is considered essential to an ultimate understanding of biological warfare potentialities because of the many unknown factors affecting the degradation of micro-organisms in the atmosphere”.⁹

Testing via Mosquito Vector in Punta Gorda, Florida

A report from The New England Journal of Medicine reveals that one of the first outbreaks of chronic fatigue syndrome was in Punta Gorda, Florida, back in 1957.(10)   It was a strange coincidence that a week before these people came down with chronic fatigue syndrome, there was a huge influx of mosquitoes.

The National Institutes of Health claimed that the mosquitoes came from a forest fire 30 miles away. The truth is that those mosquitoes were infected in Canada by Dr Guilford B. Reed at Queen’s University. They were bred in Belleville, Ontario, and taken down to Punta Gorda and released there.

Within a week, the first five cases ever of chronic fatigue syndrome were reported to the local clinic in Punta Gorda. The cases kept coming until finally 450 people were ill with the disease.

Testing via Mosquito Vector in Ontario

The Government of Canada had established the Dominion Parasite Laboratory in Belleville, Ontario, where it raised 100 million mosquitoes a month. These were shipped to Queen’s University and certain other facilities to be infected with this crystalline disease agent The mosquitoes were then let loose in certain communities in the middle of the night, so that the researchers could determine how many people would become ill with chronic fatigue syndrome or fibromyalgia, which was the first disease to show.

One of the communities they tested it on was the St Lawrence Seaway valley, all the way from Kingston to Cornwall, in 1984. They let out hundreds of millions of infected mosquitoes. Over 700 people in the next four or five weeks developed myalgic encephalomyelitis, or chronic fatigue syndrome.

Mad Cow Disease/Kuru/CJD in the Fore Tribe

Before and during World War II, at the infamous Camp 731 in Manchuria, the Japanese military contaminated prisoners of war with certain disease agents.

They also established a research camp in New Guinea in 1942. There they experimented upon the Fore Indian tribe and inoculated them with a minced-up version of the brains of diseased sheep containing the visna virus which causes “mad cow disease” or Creutzfeldt—Jakob disease.

About five or six years later, after the Japanese had been driven out, the poor people of the Fore tribe developed what they called kuru, which was their word for “wasting”, and they began to shake, lose their appetites and die. The autopsies revealed that their brains had literally turned to mush. They had contracted “mad cow disease” from the Japanese experiments.

When World War II ended, Dr Ishii Shiro—the medical doctor who was commissioned as a General in the Japanese Army so he could take command of Japan’s biological warfare development, testing and deployment—was captured. He was given the choice of a job with the United States Army or execution as a war criminal. Not surprisingly, Dr Ishii Shiro chose to work with the US military to demonstrate how the Japanese had created mad cow disease in the Fore Indian tribe.

In 1957, when the disease was beginning to blossom in full among the Fore people, Dr Carleton Gajdusek of the US National Institutes of Health headed to New Guinea to determine how the minced-up brains of the visna-infected sheep affected them. He spent a couple of years there, studying the Fore people, and wrote an extensive report. He won the Nobel Prize for “discovering” kuru disease in the Fore tribe.

Testing Carcinogens over Winnipeg, Manitoba

In 1953, the US Government asked the Canadian Government if it could test a chemical over the city of Winnipeg. It was a big city with 500,000 people, miles from anywhere. The American military sprayed this carcinogenic chemical in a 1,000%-attenuated form, which they said would be so watered down that nobody would get very sick; however, if people came to clinics with a sniffle, a sore throat or ringing in their ears, the researchers would be able to determine what percentage would have developed cancer if the chemical had been used at full strength.

We located evidence that the Americans had indeed tested this carcinogenic chemical—zinc cadmium sulphide—over Winnipeg in 1953. We wrote to the Government of Canada, explaining that we had solid evidence of the spraying and asking that we be informed as to how high up in the government the request for permission to spray had gone. We did not receive a reply.

Shortly after, the Pentagon held a press conference on May 14, 1997, where they admitted what they had done. Robert Russo, writing for the Toronto Star¹¹ from Washington, DC, reported the Pentagon’s admission that in 1953 it had obtained permission from the Canadian Government to fly over the city of Winnipeg and spray out this chemical—which sifted down on kids going to school, housewives hanging out their laundry and people going to work. US Army planes and trucks released the chemical 36 times between July and August 1953. The Pentagon got its statistics, which indicated that if the chemical released had been full strength, approximately a third of the population of Winnipeg would have developed cancers over the next five years.

One professor, Dr Hugh Fudenberg, MD, twice nominated for the Nobel Prize, wrote a magazine article stating that the Pentagon came clean on this because two researchers in Sudbury, Ontario—Don Scott and his son, Bill Scott—had been revealing this to the public. However, the legwork was done by other researchers!

The US Army actually conducted a series of simulated germ warfare tests over Winnipeg. The Pentagon lied about the tests to the mayor, saying that they were testing a chemical fog over the city, which would protect Winnipeg in the event of a nuclear attack.

A report commissioned by US Congress, chaired by Dr Rogene Henderson, lists 32 American towns and cities used as test sites as well.

V – BRUCELLA MYCOPLASMA AND DISEASE AIDS

The AIDS pathogen was created out of a Brucella bacterium mutated with a visna virus; then the toxin was removed as a DNA particle called a mycoplasma. They used the same mycoplasma to develop disabling diseases like MS, Crohn’s colitis, Lyme disease, etc.

In the previously mentioned US congressional document of a meeting held on June 9, 1969, (12) the Pentagon delivered a report to Congress about biological weapons. The Pentagon stated: “We are continuing to develop disabling weapons.” Dr MacArthur, who was in charge of the research, said: “We are developing a new lethal weapon, a synthetic biological agent that does not naturally exist, and for which no natural immunity could have been acquired.”

Think about it. If you have a deficiency of acquired immunity, you have an acquired immunity deficiency. Plain as that. AIDS.

In laboratories throughout the United States and in a certain number in Canada including at the University of Alberta. the US Government provided the leadership for the development of AIDS for the purpose of population control. After the scientists had perfected it, the government sent medical teams from the Centers for Disease Control-under the direction of Dr Donald A. Henderson, their investigator into the 1957 chronic fatigue epidemic in Punta Gorda—during 1969 to 1971 to Africa and some countries such as India, Nepal and Pakistan where they thought the population was becoming too large.¹³ They gave them all a free vaccination against smallpox; but five years after receiving this vaccination, 60% of those inoculated were suffering from AIDS. They tried to blame it on a monkey, which is nonsense.

A professor at the University of Arkansas made the claim that while studying the tissues of a dead chimpanzee she found traces of HIV. The chimpanzee that she had tested was born in the United States 23 years earlier. It had lived its entire life in a US military laboratory where it was used as an experimental animal in the development of these diseases. When it died, its body was shipped to a storage place where it was deep-frozen and stored in case they wanted to analyse it later. Then they decided that they didn’t have enough space for it, so they said, “Anybody want this dead chimpanzee?” and this researcher from Arkansas said: “Yes. Send it down to the University of Arkansas. We are happy to get anything we can get.” They shipped it down and she found HIV in it. That virus was acquired by that chimpanzee in the laboratories where it was tested.¹⁴

Chronic Fatigue Syndrome/ Myalgic Encephalomyelitis

Chronic fatigue syndrome is more accurately called myalgic encephalomyelitis. The chronic fatigue syndrome nomenclature was given by the US National Institutes of Health because it wanted to downgrade and belittle the disease.

An MRI scan of the brain of a teenage girl with chronic fatigue syndrome displayed a great many scars or punctate lesions in the left frontal lobe area where portions of the brain had literally dissolved and been replaced by scar tissue. This caused cognitive impairment, memory impairment, etc. And what was the cause of the scarring? The mycoplasma. So there is very concrete physical evidence of these tragic diseases, even though doctors continue to say they don’t know where it comes from or what they can do about it.

Many people with chronic fatigue syndrome, myalgic encephalo-myelitis and fibromyalgia who apply to the Canada Pensions Plan Review Tribunal will be turned down because they cannot prove that they are ill. During 1999 I conducted several appeals to Canada Pensions and the Workers Compensation Board (WCB, now the Workplace Safety and Insurance Board) on behalf of people who have been turned down. I provided documented evidence of these illnesses, and these people were all granted their pensions on the basis of the evidence that I provided.

In March 1999, for example, I appealed to the WCB on behalf of a lady with flbromya1gia who had been, denied her pension back in 1993. The vice-chairman of the board came to Sudbury to hear the appeal, and I showed him a number of documents which proved that this lady was physically ill with fibromyalgia. It was a disease that caused physical damage, and the disease agent was a mycoplasma. The guy listened for three hours, and then he said to me: “Mr Scott, how is it I have never heard of any of this before? I said: “We brought a top authority in this area into Sudbury to speak on this subject and not a single solitary doctor came to that presentation.”

VI-TESTING FOR MYCOPLASMA IN YOUR BODY

Polymerase Chain Reaction Test

Information is not generally available about this agent because, first of all, the mycoplasma is such a minutely small disease agent. A hundred years ago, certain medical theoreticians conceived that there must be a form or disease agent smaller than bacteria and viruses. This pathogenic organism, the mycoplasma, is so minute that normal blood and tissue tests will not reveal its presence as the source of the disease.

Your doctor may diagnose you with Alzheimer’s disease, and he will say:

“Golly, we don’t know where Alzheimer’s comes from. All we know is that your brain begins to deteriorate, cells rupture, the myelin sheath around the nerves dissolves, and so on.” Or if you have chronic fatigue syndrome, the doctor will not be able to find any cause for your illness with ordinary blood and tissue tests.

This mycoplasma couldn’t be detected until about 30 years ago when the polymerase chain reaction (PCR) test was developed, in which a sample of your blood is examined and damaged particles are removed and subjected to a polymerase chain reaction. This causes the DNA in the particles to break down. The particles are then placed in a nutrient, which causes the DNA to grow back into its original form. If enough of the substance is produced, the form can be recognised, so it can be determined whether Brucella or another kind of agent is behind that particular mycoplasma.

Blood Test

If you or anybody in your family has myalgic encephalomyelitis, fibromyalgia, multiple sclerosis or Alzheimer’s, you can send a blood sample to Dr Les Simpson in New Zealand for testing.

If you are ill with these diseases, your red blood cells will not be normal doughnut-shaped blood cells capable of being compressed and squeezed through the capillaries, but will swell up like cherry-filled doughnuts which cannot be compressed. The blood cells become enlarged and distended because the only way the mycoplasma can exist is by uptaking pre-formed sterols from the host cell. One of the best sources of pre-formed sterols is cholesterol, and cholesterol is what gives your blood cells flexibility. If the cholesterol is taken out by the mycoplasma, the red blood cell swells up and doesn’t go through, and the person begins to feel all the aches and pains and all the damage it causes to the brain, the heart, the stomach, the feet and the whole body because blood and oxygen are cut off.

And that is why people with fibromyalgia and chronic fatigue syndrome have such a terrible time. When the blood is cut off from the brain, punctate lesions appear because those parts of the brain die. The mycoplasma will get into portions of the heart muscle, especially the left ventricle, and those cells will die. Certain people have cells in the lateral ventricles of the brain that have a genetic predisposition to admit the mycoplasma, and this causes the lateral ventricles to deteriorate and die. This leads to multiple sclerosis, which will progress until these people are totally disabled; frequently, they die prematurely. The mycoplasma will get into the lower bowel, parts of which will die, thus causing colitis. All of these diseases are caused by the degenerating properties of the mycoplasma.

In early 2000, a gentleman in Sudbury phoned me and told me he had fibromyalgia. He applied for a pension and was turned down because his doctor said it was all in his head and there was no external evidence. I gave him the proper form and a vial, and he sent his blood to Dr Simpson to be tested. He did this with his family doctor’s approval, and the results from Dr Simpson showed that only 4% of his red blood cells were functioning normally and carrying the appropriate amount of oxygen to his poor body, whereas 83% were distended, enlarged and hardened, and wouldn’t go through the capillaries without an awful lot of pressure and trouble. This is the physical evidence of the damage that is done.

ECG Test

You can also ask your doctor to give you a 24-hour Holter ECG. You know, of course, that an electrocardiogram is a measure of your heartbeat and shows what is going on in the right ventricle, the left ventricle and so on. Tests show that 100% of patients with chronic fatigue syndrome and fibromyalgia have an irregular heartbeat. At various periods during the 24 hours, the heart, instead of working happily away going “bump-BUMP, bump-BUMP”, every now and again goes “buhbuhbuhbuhbubbuhbuhbuhbuh”. The T-wave (the waves are called P, Q, R, S and T) is normally a peak, and then the wave levels off and starts with the P-wave again. In chronic fatigue and fibromyalgia patients, the T-wave flattens off, or actually inverts. That means the blood in the left ventricle is not being squeezed up through the aorta and around through the body.

My client from Sudbury had this test done and, lo and behold, the results stated: “The shape of T and S-T suggests left ventricle strain pattern, although voltage and so on is normal.” The doctor had no clue as to why the T-wave was not working properly. I analysed the report of this patient who had been turned down by Canada Pensions and sent it back to them. They wrote back, saying: “It looks like we may have made a mistake. We are going to give you a hearing and you can explain this to us in more detail.”

So it is not all in your imagination. There is actual physical damage to the heart. The left ventricle muscles do show scarring.

That is way many people are diagnosed with a heart condition when they first develop fibromyalgia, but it’s only one of several problems because the mycoplasma can do all kinds of damage.

Blood Volume Test

You can also ask your doctor for a blood volume test. Every human being requires a certain amount of blood per pound of body weight, and it has been observed that people with fibromyalgia, chronic fatigue syndrome, multiple sclerosis and other illnesses do not have the normal blood volume their body needs to function properly. Doctors aren’t normally aware of this.

This test measures the amount of blood in the human body by taking out 5 cc, putting a tracer in it and then putting it back into the body. One hour later, take out 5 cc again and look for the tracer. The thicker the blood and the lower the blood volume, the more tracer you will find.

The analysis of one of my clients stated: “This patient was referred for red cell mass study. The red cell volume is 16.9 ml per kg of body weight. The normal range is 25 to 35 ml per kg. This guy has 36% less blood in his body than the body needs to function.” And the doctor hadn’t even known the test existed.

If you lost 36% of your blood in an accident, do you think your doctor would tell you that you are allright and should just take up line dancing and get over it? They would rush you to the nearest hospital and start transfusing you with blood. These tragic people with these awful diseases are functioning with anywhere from 7% to 50% less blood than their body needs to function.

VII- UNDOING THE DAMAGE

The body undoes the damage itself. The scarring in the brain of people with chronic fatigue and fibromyalgia will be repaired. There is cellular repair going on all the time. But the mycoplasma has moved on to the next cell.

In the early stages of a disease, doxycydine may reverse that disease process. It is one of the tetracycline antibiotics, but it is not bactericidal; it is bacteriostatic—it stops the growth of the mycoplasma. And if the mycoplasma growth can be stopped for long enough, then the immune system takes over.

Doxycycline treatment is discussed in a paper by mycoplasma expert Professor Garth Nicholson, PhD, of the Institute for Molecular Medicine.” Dr Nicholson is involved in a US$8 million mycoplasma research program funded by the US military and headed by Dr Charles Engel of the NIH. The program is studying Gulf War veterans, 450 of them, because there is evidence to suggest that Gulf War syndrome is another illness (or set of illnesses) caused by mycoplasma.

About the Author

Donald Scott, MA, MSc, is a retired high school teacher and university professor. He is also a veteran of WWII and was awarded the North Atlantic Star, the Burma Star with Clasp, the 1939—1945 Volunteer Service Medal and the Victory Medal. He is currently President of The Common Cause Medical Research Foundation, a not-for-profit organisation devoted to research into neurosystemic degenerative diseases. He is also Adjunct Professor with the Institute for Molecular Medicine and he produces and edits the journal of Degenerative Diseases. He has extensively researched neurosystemic degenerative diseases over the past five years and has authored many documents on the relationship between degenerative diseases and a pathogenic mycoplasma called Mycoplasma fermentans. His research is based upon solid government evidence.

You may contact Donald Scott at: 190 Mountain St., Ste. 405, Sudbury, Ontario, Canada P3B 4G2. 705-670-0180.

Endnotes

1. “Pathogenic Mycoplasma”, US Patent No. 5,242,820, issued September 7, 1993. Dr Lo is listed as the Inventor” and the American Registry of Pathology, Washington, DC, is listed as the “Assignee”.
2. “Special Virus Cancer Program: Progress Report No. 8”, prepared by the National Cancer Institute, Viral Oncology, Etiology Area, July 1971, submitted to NIH Annual Report in May 1971 and updated July 1971.
3. US Senate, Ninety-fifth Congress, Hearings before the Subcommittee on Health and Scientific Research of the Committee on Human Resources, Biological Testing Involving Human Subjects by the Department of Defense, 1977; released as US Army Activities in the US Biological Warfare Programs, Volumes One and Two, 24 February 1977.
4. Dr Donald MacArthur, Pentagon, Department of Defense Appropriations for 1970, Hearings before Subcommittee of the Committee on Appropriations, House of Representatives, Ninety-First Congress, First Session, Monday June 9, 1969, pp 105—144, esp. pp. 114, 129.
5. Kyger, E. R. and Russell L. Haden, “Brucellosis and Multiple Sclerosis”, The American journal of Medical Sciences 1949:689-693.
6. Colmonero et al., “Complications Associated with Brucella melitensis Infection: A Study of 530 Cases”, Medicine 1996;75(4).
7. Howell, Miller, Kelly and Bookman, “Acute Brucellosis Among Laboratory Workers”, New England Journal of Medicine 1948;236:741.
8. “Special Virus Cancer Program: Progress Report No. 8”, ibid., table 4, p. 135.
9. US Senate, Hearings before the Subcommittee on Health and Scientific Research of the Committee on Human Resources, March 8 and May 23, 1977, ibid.
10. New England journal of Medicine, August 22, 1957, p. 362.
11. Toronto Star, May 15, 1997.
12. Dr Donald MacArthur, Pentagon, Department of Defense Appropriations for 1970, Hearings, Monday June 9, 1969, ibid., p.129.
13. Henderson, Donald A., “Smallpox: Epitaph for a Killer”, National Geographic, December 1978, p. 804.
14. Blum, Deborah, The Monkey Wars, Oxford University Press, New York, 1994.
15. Nicholson, G. 1., “Doxycycline treatment and Desert Storm”, JAMA 1995;273:61 8-619.

This article first appeared on The Vaccination Racket.

Advertisement

8 Damn Good Reasons Not to Get the Flu Shot

By JEFFRY J. AUFDERHEIDE | VACTRUTH | FEBRUARY 4, 2013

Every year the mainstream media war drum beats for you to get vaccinated against the flu. They rarely discuss anything but the benefits of the vaccine.

Why?

Maybe it is because many people are already skeptical about the flu vaccine.

I’m going to be very up front with you here. You rarely hear about the adverse reactions or about the toxic chemicals being injected into you. My goal is to get you to investigate vaccines more closely. Here are eight reasons to question the flu shot.

Let’s begin…

REASON #1: NEUROTOXIC INGREDIENTS

A common urban myth is that the mercury has been taken out of vaccines. This is not true.

Several of the flu vaccines contain a neurotoxic ingredient called thimerosal (mercury). Each one of the flu vaccines listed below contains 25 micrograms of mercury. [1] The vaccines are:

• Afluria CSL (Limited for Merck)
• FluLaval (GlaxoSmithKline)
• Fluvirin (Novartis)
• Fluzone (Sanofi Pasteur)

Keep in mind you are being told conflicting stories.

After parents and scientists discovered that mercury was present in the vaccines, they had concerns about the substance causing neurological problems in children.

Organizations such as the American Academy of Pediatrics and the Centers for Disease Control have told you mercury in the vaccines isn’t bad for us, but as a precaution, it will be taken out of the vaccines.

Now the same organizations are telling parents if mercury isn’t kept it in the vaccines, millions will suffer. Why? Removing the mercury from vaccines would cause a major disruption in the manufacturing and supply of vaccines.[2]

Much of the evidence on the toxicity of thimerosal was swept under the rug at a secret meeting held by the Centers for Disease Control in Simpsonwood, Georgia. I’d like to invite you to read a few quotes from the meeting. I think you will see why the Centers for Disease Control wants to keep the lid on thimerosal.

Here are three important quotes from the Simpsonwood Document:

“…the number of dose related relationships [between mercury and autism] are linear and statistically significant. You can play with this all you want. They are linear. They are statistically significant.” – Dr. William Weil, American Academy of Pediatrics. Simpsonwood, GA, June 7, 2000

“Forgive this personal comment, but I got called out at eight o’clock for an emergency call and my daughter-in-law delivered a son by c-section. Our first male in the line of the next generation and I do not want that grandson to get a Thimerosal containing vaccine until we know better what is going on. It will probably take a long time. In the meantime, and I know there are probably implications for this internationally, but in the meanwhile I think I want that grandson to only be given Thimerosal-free vaccines.” – Dr. Robert Johnson, Immunologist, University of Colorado, Simpsonwood, GA, June 7, 2000

“But there is now the point at which the research results have to be handled, and even if this committee decides that there is no association and that information gets out, the work has been done and through the freedom of information that will be taken by others and will be used in other ways beyond the control of this group. And I am very concerned about that as I suspect that it is already too late to do anything regardless of any professional body and what they say…My mandate as I sit here in this group is to make sure at the end of the day that 100,000,000 are immunized with DTP, Hepatitis B and if possible Hib, this year, next year and for many years to come, and that will have to be with thimerosal containing vaccines unless a miracle occurs and an alternative is found quickly and is tried and found to be safe.” – Dr. John Clements, World Health Organization, Simpsonwood, GA, June 7, 2000 [3]

We at VacTruth encourage you to investigate what is being injected into your child.

 REASON #2: 4250% INCREASE IN FETAL DEATHS REPORTED

Speaking of mercury being unsafe — if you’re pregnant, beware of doctors using aggressive fear tactics pushing you to get vaccinated. Here’s why…

On September 27, 2012, the Human and Environmental Toxicology Journal (HET) published a study by Dr. Gary Goldman reporting a 4,250 percent increase in the number of miscarriages and stillbirths reported to VAERS in the 2009/2010 flu season. [4]

That year the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) had recommended the double-dosing pregnant mothers with two flu shots spiked with mercury.

In his abstract, Goldman said:

“The aim of this study was to compare the number of inactivated-influenza vaccine–related spontaneous abortion and stillbirth (SB) reports in the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) database during three consecutive flu seasons beginning 2008/2009 and assess the relative fetal death reports associated with the two-vaccine 2009/2010 season.” [4]

How can injecting these filthy vaccines into pregnant mothers be remotely safe?

 REASON #3: VACCINE-INDUCED NARCOLEPSY

Do you recall the vaccine-frenzied media telling us to get our flu shots during the H1N1 pandemic? What they didn’t tell you are the possible long-term side effects of those vaccines that are now being revealed.

Recent news about the flu vaccine suspects one of the experimental vaccines causing narcolepsy in about 800 European children. [5]

Specifically, two studies in Finland directly point the finger at the vaccine. [6, 7]

The conclusion of one study states:

“We observed a 17-fold increase in the annual incidence of narcolepsy in 2010 as compared to previous years in children aged under 17 years of age. A common feature in the history of our 54 newly diagnosed childhood narcoleptic patients was that 50 children had received an adjuvanted pandemic influenza vaccine (Pandemrix) within 8 months before the onset of symptoms. In most cases, the development of symptoms was fast. We consider it likely that Pandemrix vaccination contributed to the increased incidence of narcolepsy in Finland…” [7]

The children’s misfortune is they now have to deal with an illness that all but destroys their once normal life. Do you think the pharmaceutical companies will take any responsibility?

 REASON #4: “THEY ARE PROTECTED” … FROM YOU!

I’m not sure about other countries, but in the United States, if your child is harmed by a vaccine, there is little action you can take legally.

The 1986 National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act was passed was to protect pharmaceutical companies from anyone claiming a vaccine injured their child. Under this law, no parent can sue a vaccine manufacturer. [8]

If you decide to vaccinate your children, you do so at your own risk. No vaccine manufacturer is liable for your child’s vaccine-related injury or death from a recommended vaccine, regardless if the FDA or CDC helped get an untested flu vaccine approved.

 REASON #5: IF YOU GET VACCINATED, YOU SHED THE VIRUS

If getting injected with neurotoxins or suffering from narcolepsy isn’t enough, expect to shed the flu virus and likely infect others if you decide to get the nasal spray vaccine.

Information from the Centers for Disease Control website indicates “that both children and adults vaccinated with live-attenuated influenza vaccine (LAIV) can shed vaccine viruses after vaccination, although in lower amounts than occur typically with shedding of wild-type influenza viruses.” [9]

In one study of children in a daycare setting, 80% of vaccine recipients shed one or more virus strains for an average of 7.5 days. [9]

 REASON #6: IF YOU GET THE FLU VACCINE, EXPECT TO GET THE FLU

This might be a shock to you – if you investigate the vaccine carefully enough, you’ll discover that getting vaccinated can actually predispose you to getting the flu!

One particular study surprised researchers when they discovered “a significant positive association between the seasonal influenza vaccine and lab confirmed pH1N1 was observed.” [10]

As anecdotal evidence, you may or may not have seen what happened to television host Piers Morgan. If you didn’t, here is the condensed version.

Piers Morgan went on the Dr. Oz television show to get injected with the toxic flu vaccine in front of a live audience. Days later he came down with the flu. [11]

Did the flu vaccine cause him to get the flu? You can decide for yourself on this one.

 REASON #7: EVERY YEAR THE EXPERTS GUESS

Do you know how the flu strain is picked to put into the vaccine every year? The “experts” guess.

Every year, the influenza viruses in the seasonal flu vaccine are selected through calculations about what flu viruses are most likely to cause illness in the coming season. The FDA, acting in concert with the CDC, decides what vaccine strains for influenza vaccines to be sold in the U.S. [12]

What happens if the virus mutates or the “experts” guess incorrectly? Please see Reason #1…

 REASON #8: THE CENTERS FOR DISEASE CONTROL’S RECIPE FOR GENERATING FEAR

Many people believe the Centers for Disease Control is beyond using propaganda ploys. You might get a different impression from the information I’m about to share with you. It may seem as if the CDC fears you into getting vaccinated, much like doctors do.

What do I mean and where is this recipe?

Some years ago, the associate director for communications for the national immunization program, Glen Nowak, made a presentation entitled Planning for the 2004-05 Influenza Vaccination Season: A Communication Situation Analysis.

I am going to include the entire “recipe” so you can see the complexity of the propaganda being regularly used on you to get vaccinated.

The slide on page 27 of the presentation reads:

“Recipe” that Fosters Higher Interest and Demand for Influenza Vaccine

1. Influenza’s arrival coincides with immunization “season” (i.e., when people can take action)

2. Dominant strain and/or initial cases of disease are:

–Associated with severe illness and/or outcomes

–Occur among people for whom influenza is not generally perceived to cause serious complications (e.g., children, healthy adults, healthy seniors)

–In cities and communities with significant media outlets (e.g., daily newspapers, major TV stations)

3. Medical experts and public health authorities publicly (e.g., via media) state concern and alarm (and predict dire outcomes)–and urge influenza vaccination.

4. The combination of ‘2’ and ‘3’ result in:

A. Significant media interest and attention

B. Framing of the flu season in terms that motivate behavior (e.g., as “very severe,” “more severe than last or past years,” “deadly”)

C. Continued reports (e.g., from health officials and media) that influenza is causing severe illness and/or affecting lots of people–helping foster the perception that many people are susceptible to a bad case of influenza.

6. Visible/tangible examples of the seriousness of the illness (e.g., pictures of children, families of those affected coming forward) and people getting vaccinated (the first to motivate, the latter to reinforce)

7. References to, and discussions, of pandemic influenza– along with continued reference to the importance of vaccination.” [13]

The message is extremely familiar. You see it played out every year on the news channels. To be clear, what you just read is a recipe to sell more of Big Pharma’s toxic vaccines.

References

1. http://www.vaccinesafety.edu/thi-table.htm

2. http://vactruth.com/2012/12/23/mercury-in-vaccines/

3. http://www.putchildrenfirst.org/chapter2.html

4. http://het.sagepub.com/content/early/2012/09/12/0960327112455067.abstract?rss=1

5. http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/01/22/us-narcolepsy…

6. http://www.plosone.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pone.0033536#close

7. http://www.plosone.org/article/info%3Adoi/10.1371/journal.pone.0033723

8. http://www.hrsa.gov/vaccinecompensation/index.html

9. http://www.cdc.gov/flu/professionals/acip/laiv-shed.htm

10. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22001885

11. http://www.infowars.com/piers-morgan-falls-ill-days-after-receiving-flu-vaccine/

12. http://www.cdc.gov/flu/professionals/vaccination/virusqa.htm

13. http://www.scribd.com/doc/19212191/2004flunowak

The Medical Intervention your baby does not need

Vaccination – A Very Personal Decision. Are You Informed?

By MARKUS HEINZE | VACTRUTH | JANUARY 21, 2012

You are about to become a parent. Inside your womb, a little miracle is growing. If you are like my wife and I, you take a proactive approach to your child’s safety. You find the best car seats, the safest toys, plan your child’s educational future. You want nothing but the best for your unborn child.

The moment arrives. As you are holding your newborn child in your arms for the first time, someone in the next room or down the hall prepares a little shot for your baby. Soon your baby will be injected with neurotoxins and other preservatives, and their immune system will be challenged to its core. This is one aspect of parenthood you haven’t researched, as you haven’t heard about anyone jumping off the vaccination bandwagon.

You wouldn’t take a chance on car seats, formula, cribs, or toys, but you are unknowingly taking one on vaccines. If you’re lucky, you’ll take your child home soon without visible complications. If you aren’t lucky, you may experience what other parents in your situation have experienced: a vaccine-injured child.

PROTECT YOUR BABY

Now, as you become aware that you have not researched vaccines, you can become proactive. You will want credible information to help guide you to make an informed decision.

Every year, tens of thousands of children in America and around the world are severely injured or killed by vaccines. This isn’t an urban myth or a debatable accusation—it’s an easily verifiable fact.

The United States government keeps a database to record such events. According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), approximately 30,000 Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) reports are filed annually, with 10-15 percent classified as serious, resulting in permanent disability, hospitalization, life-threatening illnesses or death. [1] And those are only the reported cases of vaccine induced deaths, disability, illness and hospitalization.

The vast majority of people have no idea that vaccines pose both obvious and hidden dangers to their children—until their own child experiences a severe, vaccine-related reaction.

A mother states the following:

Vaccines kill at a much higher rate than we are led to believe. We play vaccine roulette with our children’s lives and we never know which child will fall victim next. If the odds are 1 in 500,000 for death, 1 in 100,000 for permanent brain injury, 1 in 1,700 for seizures and convulsions or 1 in 100 for adverse reaction, are you willing to take that chance? Are any odds acceptable enough to convince you to gamble with your child’s life?

I can assure you that death from vaccination is neither quick nor painless. I helplessly watched my daughter suffer an excruciatingly slow death as she screamed and arched her back in pain, while the vaccine did as it was intended to do and assaulted her immature immune system.

The poisons used as preservatives seeped through her tiny body, overwhelming her vital organs one by one until they collapsed. It is an image that will haunt me forever, and I hope no other parent ever has to witness it. [2]

You don’t have to play the lottery with your child’s life, hoping nothing goes wrong when they are injected with the potentially lethal neurotoxins such as formaldehyde, aluminum hydroxide, aluminum phosphate, thimerosal, and polysorbate 80, which are routinely included in vaccines. [3]

There are plenty of resources available to provide you with a review of the medical and scientific literature surrounding vaccination risks, as well as personal stories from those whose lives have been touched by vaccine-related injuries.

Your goal is to become a better-informed parent so you can keep your child safe from neurotoxins. By becoming more informed on the vaccine topic, you hopefully will not have to experience what other parents have experienced: taking a healthy son or daughter to the doctor’s office for immunizations and returning home with a child who will soon become severely disabled, sick, or dead.

THE MEDICAL INTERVENTION YOUR BABY DOES NOT NEED

Medical interventions are difficult decisions, especially when parents have to make these decisions for their little children. Having to choose whether or not to intervene medically can be simple if your child is ill and the medical intervention has been proven to make your child feel better.

If your child is healthy, however, the decision to medically intervene becomes more difficult, especially when the information on the effectiveness of the medical intervention is conflicting and inconclusive. Vaccinating your child is one of those medical interventions.

Unfortunately, most parents don’t even realize that they are making a decision when they choose to vaccinate their child, as they blindly follow the recommendation of their pediatrician. Only parents whose children have been harmed by a vaccine, or who know children who have been harmed by a vaccine, tend to research the topic of vaccine safety and effectiveness on their own.

CONCLUSION

I am one of those parents.

My teachers always told me that there was nothing worse than following blindly, as in doing so, I was empowering a group of a few people to make decisions for the masses. Some of my teachers had seen Nazism and Stalinism and knew very well what they were talking about.

There are great dangers involved in riding any bandwagon. Once we parents take our seats on the bandwagon, we are no longer leading our families – we are simply fellow passengers, along with our children.

We are no longer the ones making decisions for ourselves or our kids—we have ceded this important responsibility to whomever is driving that particular bandwagon. And this is a mistake.

In any wagonload of people, the needs of individual passengers may differ greatly, and what might be good for the majority of the passengers might be quite dangerous – even deadly – for others. And if ‘others’ is our child, it is our responsibility – not the driver’s – to foresee the danger and keep them from taking that deadly trip.

References

1.  Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 08 February 2011. Web. 14 May 2012. <http://www.cdc.gov/vaccinesafety/Activities/vaers.html>.

2. Colebeck, Christine. “Death by Lethal Vaccine Infection.” Rense.com. 17 Sept. 2004. Web. 14 May 2012. <http://www.rense.com/>.

3. Vaccine ingredients. (n.d.). Retrieved from http://www.informedchoice.info/cocktail.html

 

U.S. Hospitals illegally firing workers who do not take the flu shot

Note: Hospitals and other healthcare facilities use vaccination “policies”, not laws, to force workers to take the shots. That is because forcing someone to take a vaccine is illegal, therefore no law exists to truly mandate vaccinations.

By LINDSEY TANNER | AP | JANUARY 14, 2013

Patients can refuse a flu shot. Should doctors and nurses have that right, too? That is the thorny question surfacing as U.S. hospitals increasingly crack down on employees who won’t get flu shots, with some workers losing their jobs over their refusal.

“Where does it say that I am no longer a patient if I’m a nurse,” wondered Carrie Calhoun, a longtime critical care nurse in suburban Chicago who was fired last month after she refused a flu shot.

Hospitals’ get-tougher measures coincide with an earlier-than-usual flu season hitting harder than in recent mild seasons. Flu is widespread in most states, and at least 20 children have died.

Most doctors and nurses do get flu shots. But in the past two months, at least 15 nurses and other hospital staffers in four states have been fired for refusing, and several others have resigned, according to affected workers, hospital authorities and published reports.

In Rhode Island, one of three states with tough penalties behind a mandatory vaccine policy for health care workers, more than 1,000 workers recently signed a petition opposing the policy, according to a labor union that has filed suit to end the regulation.

Why would people whose job is to protect sick patients refuse a flu shot? The reasons vary: allergies to flu vaccine, which are rare; religious objections; and skepticism about whether vaccinating health workers will prevent flu in patients.

Dr. Carolyn Bridges, associate director for adult immunization at the federal Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, says the strongest evidence is from studies in nursing homes, linking flu vaccination among health care workers with fewer patient deaths from all causes.

“We would all like to see stronger data,” she said. But other evidence shows flu vaccination “significantly decreases” flu cases, she said. “It should work the same in a health care worker versus somebody out in the community.”

Cancer nurse Joyce Gingerich is among the skeptics and says her decision to avoid the shot is mostly “a personal thing.” She’s among seven employees at IU Health Goshen Hospital in northern Indiana who were recently fired for refusing flu shots. Gingerich said she gets other vaccinations but thinks it should be a choice. She opposes “the injustice of being forced to put something in my body.”

Medical ethicist Art Caplan says health care workers’ ethical obligation to protect patients trumps their individual rights.

“If you don’t want to do it, you shouldn’t work in that environment,” said Caplan, medical ethics chief at New York University’s Langone Medical Center. “Patients should demand that their health care provider gets flu shots — and they should ask them.”

For some people, flu causes only mild symptoms. But it can also lead to pneumonia, and there are thousands of hospitalizations and deaths each year. The number of deaths has varied in recent decades from about 3,000 to 49,000.

A survey by CDC researchers found that in 2011, more than 400 U.S. hospitals required flu vaccinations for their employees and 29 hospitals fired unvaccinated employees.

At Calhoun’s hospital, Alexian Brothers Medical Center in Elk Grove Village, Ill., unvaccinated workers granted exemptions must wear masks and tell patients, “I’m wearing the mask for your safety,” Calhoun says. She says that’s discriminatory and may make patients want to avoid “the dirty nurse” with the mask.

The hospital justified its vaccination policy in an email, citing the CDC’s warning that this year’s flu outbreak was “expected to be among the worst in a decade” and noted that Illinois has already been hit especially hard. The mandatory vaccine policy “is consistent with our health system’s mission to provide the safest environment possible.”

The government recommends flu shots for nearly everyone, starting at age 6 months. Vaccination rates among the general public are generally lower than among health care workers.

According to the most recent federal data, about 63 percent of U.S. health care workers had flu shots as of November. That’s up from previous years, but the government wants 90 percent coverage of health care workers by 2020.

The highest rate, about 88 percent, was among pharmacists, followed by doctors at 84 percent, and nurses, 82 percent. Fewer than half of nursing assistants and aides are vaccinated, Bridges said.

Some hospitals have achieved 90 percent but many fall short. A government health advisory panel has urged those below 90 percent to consider a mandatory program.

Also, the accreditation body over hospitals requires them to offer flu vaccines to workers, and those failing to do that and improve vaccination rates could lose accreditation.

Starting this year, the government’s Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services is requiring hospitals to report employees’ flu vaccination rates as a means to boost the rates, the CDC’s Bridges said. Eventually the data will be posted on the agency’s “Hospital Compare” website.

Several leading doctor groups support mandatory flu shots for workers. And the American Medical Association in November endorsed mandatory shots for those with direct patient contact in nursing homes; elderly patients are particularly vulnerable to flu-related complications. The American Nurses Association supports mandates if they’re adopted at the state level and affect all hospitals, but also says exceptions should be allowed for medical or religious reasons.

Mandates for vaccinating health care workers against other diseases, including measles, mumps and hepatitis, are widely accepted. But some workers have less faith that flu shots work — partly because there are several types of flu virus that often differ each season and manufacturers must reformulate vaccines to try and match the circulating strains.

While not 100 percent effective, this year’s vaccine is a good match, the CDC’s Bridges said.

Several states have laws or regulations requiring flu vaccination for health care workers but only three — Arkansas, Maine and Rhode Island — spell out penalties for those who refuse, according to Alexandra Stewart, a George Washington University expert in immunization policy and co-author of a study appearing this month in the journal Vaccine.

Rhode Island’s regulation, enacted in December, may be the toughest and is being challenged in court by a health workers union. The rule allows exemptions for religious or medical reasons, but requires unvaccinated workers in contact with patients to wear face masks during flu season. Employees who refuse the masks can be fined $100 and may face a complaint or reprimand for unprofessional conduct that could result in losing their professional license.

Some Rhode Island hospitals post signs announcing that workers wearing masks have not received flu shots. Opponents say the masks violate their health privacy.

“We really strongly support the goal of increasing vaccination rates among health care workers and among the population as a whole,” but it should be voluntary, said SEIU Healthcare Employees Union spokesman Chas Walker.

Supporters of health care worker mandates note that to protect public health, courts have endorsed forced vaccination laws affecting the general population during disease outbreaks, and have upheld vaccination requirements for schoolchildren.

Cases involving flu vaccine mandates for health workers have had less success. A 2009 New York state regulation mandating health care worker vaccinations for swine flu and seasonal flu was challenged in court but was later rescinded because of a vaccine shortage. And labor unions have challenged individual hospital mandates enacted without collective bargaining; an appeals court upheld that argument in 2007 in a widely cited case involving Virginia Mason Hospital in Seattle.

Calhoun, the Illinois nurse, says she is unsure of her options.

“Most of the hospitals in my area are all implementing these policies,” she said. “This conflict could end the career I have dedicated myself to.”

Vote on our Poll below:

Reduce Two Leading Childhood Diseases by 50% or More without Vaccines

By JEFFREY J. AUFDERHEIDE | VACTRUTH | JANUARY 4, 2012

It’s not black magic or some out-of-date belief—just good old-fashioned common sense.

Better hygiene, sanitation, and organic food are the foundations for good health. But to what degree could one of those elements (hygiene, for example) have an effect on decreasing a disease? I think finding the answer to this question and considering the evidence is valuable for parents who are considering vaccinating their children.

Why?

Mainstream health officials at the Centers for Disease Control and other such agencies in the United States use emotionally charged language to declare that vaccines—not better sanitation or hygiene— saved the world from deadly diseases.

It is for this reason that I must warn you: Those who push vaccines often trivialize or underestimate the information I am going to share with you. It completely destroys what they have been told for many years.

If you’re interested in learning more, read on.

The Gold Standard

The big secret vaccine peddlers avoid like the plague is, one amazingly simple act reduced two diseases by 50% or more. The most vital point to remember: The decrease in morbidity of—or the rate of incidence of a disease—those affected by the diseases had nothing to do with vaccines!

To get our answer, we turn to Karachi, Pakistan.

In 2002, a randomized controlled trial (a gold standard of scientific research) was performed by Dr. Stephen P. Luby in Karachi, Pakistan. The goal of the study was to assess the impact of hand washing and bathing with soap in settings where infectious diseases are leading causes of childhood disease and death. [1–3]

It is known as the Karachi Health Soap Study.

It’s noteworthy to keep in mind that the variable studied was hand washing—not improved sanitation (waste water treatment), clean drinking water, better food or storage, or even vaccines. In Karachi, sewage contaminates the drinking water and feces contaminates the environment. This is what makes the study so radically powerful!

If you want to see an overview of what was done, read on.

The Power of Simplicity and Education

Here are the some relevant facts you should know about the Karachi Health Soap Study[3]:

• 25 neighborhoods were either given an antibacterial soap (containing 1.2% triclocarban) or plain soap.
• 11 neighborhoods were the control. In other words, no hygiene promotion occurred, and no soap was dispensed in these neighborhoods.
• Both the antibacterial soap and plain soap looked and smelled identical.
• Both types of soap were packaged identically in generic white wrappers. Neither the fieldworkers nor the families knew whether the soaps were antibacterial or plain.
• Fieldworkers reviewed with the families the health problems that resulted from contaminated hands and provided them with specific hand-washing instructions.
• Fieldworkers encouraged households to wash their hands after defecation, after cleaning an infant who had defecated, before preparing food, before eating, and before feeding infants.
• Fieldworkers encouraged participants to bathe once a day with soap and water.

Here’s what happened next…

Dramatic Decrease in Diseases

Remember my warning in the beginning of the article about the information being dismissed? As you will see, the results are very dramatic.

As noted by the study, in the first 6 months not much change or variation (only 6%) was noted between the different groups. In the graph below, the biggest change came in the second half of the year.

The results of the study were analyzed after 51 weeks.

• Primary diarrhea outcomes in children younger than 15 years by intervention group
  • Antibacterial soap: 47% fewer incidences of diarrhea than control group
  • Plain soap: 52% fewer incidences of diarrhea than control group

• Primary respiratory outcomes in children younger than 15 years by intervention group
  • Antibacterial soap: 45% fewer incidences of pneumonia than control group
  • Plain soap: 50% fewer incidences of pneumonia than control group

It is essential to reemphasize, the World Health Organization lists pneumonia (lower-respiratory infection) and diarrhea as the number 1 and number 2 diseases, which kill more than 3.5 million children worldwide each year. [3–5]

This seems to be in harmony with the principle that Antoine Bechamp—and even Weston Price—wrote about many years ago: The health of the host is everything. The disease is nothing. [6]

Considering that the people in the Karachi study drank the same water, ate the same foods, had the same indoor plumbing (or lack thereof), etc., a significant question has to be asked. If simple hand washing can decrease the morbidity of diarrhea and pneumonia by 50% or more, what happens when better sanitation facilities, food storage, and quality of food are introduced?

Even more important, I’d think there would be comparative data on the effectiveness of hand washing and vaccines. But if that were to happen—given the safety track record of soap versus vaccines—the entire vaccine program would receive a severe death blow.

What we know is when the standard of living increases, mortality and morbidity rates fall.

As an example, mortality rates (not morbidity) in the United States decreased prior to the introduction of vaccines (notice there was not a vaccine for scarlet fever).

What could cause such an intense drop in mortality rates? It obviously wasn’t the vaccines. If vaccines caused a 50% drop in morbidity or mortality rate of a disease within a 6-month period, the media would broadcast it all over the news, singing the praises and benefits of getting injected.

The irony of this study is that the Centers for Disease Control provided some funding and reviewed the data. Here’s an excerpt from the study:

The balance of the funding was provided by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Inclusion of soap trade names is for identification only and does not imply endorsement by CDC or the Department of Health and Human Services. These data were presented in part at the International Conference on Emerging Infectious Diseases, Atlanta, GA, USA, in February, 2004. [3]

So, now you know that some people at the Centers for Disease Control know. But here’s the clincher.

Vaccine Pushers

The Centers for Disease Control recommend the following vaccines in the United States to prevent the very same diseases discussed above.

For diarrhea: RotaTeq® (RV5) and Rotarix® (RV1). [7]

For pneumonia: Pneumococcal, haemophilus influenzae type b (Hib), pertussis (whooping cough), varicella (chickenpox), measles, and influenza (flu) vaccine. [8]

Does the Centers for Disease Control mention washing hands as a means of prevention? Sure—in passing.

They say something to the effect that good hygiene is important, but is not enough to control the spread of the disease. They recommend vaccines.

Then again, you might want to consider why the CDC is so adamant about recommending vaccines. For example, this is from an article on Mercola.com:

Dr. Paul Offit of the Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia earned millions of dollars as part of a $182-million sale by the hospital of its worldwide royalty interest in the Merck Rotateq vaccine … The high price placed on the patents raises concerns over Offit’s use of his former position on the CDC’s Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) to help create the market for rotavirus vaccine— effectively, to vote himself rich. [9]

Could the deep ties to the pharmaceutical companies be the reason the CDC puts more emphasis on vaccines? Considering the evidence presented in the Karachi Health Soap Study, which would you choose—better hygiene or a vaccine?

Conclusion

What’s the moral of the story?

The data revealed by Stephen P. Luby in the Karachi Health Soap Study is nothing short of spectacular. Children who washed their hands and skin with plain soap had 52% less diarrhea and 50% less pneumonia. Good hygiene has a significant impact on decreasing disease, and I think it is something we take for granted in the United States.

Please remember this point: If better nutrition and sanitation were added as components of this or a future study, I suspect that Karachi, Pakistan, would see a more dramatic drop in diseases, much like in the United States—and I would highly encourage such efforts.

Just imagine the implications of a comparative study being performed between hygiene practices and vaccines for decreasing disease. What do you think the outcome would be? My money would be on hygiene practices being the clear winner.

Here’s the shocking reality.

You hold in your hands the real power and master key to good health. It doesn’t come through the tip of a needle.

References

1. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Randomized_controlled_trial
2. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Levels_of_evidence
3. Luby, Stephen P., Mubina Agboatwalla, Daniel R. Feikin, John Painter, Ward Billhimer, Arshad Altaf, and Robert M. Hoekstra.“Effect of Handwashing on Child Health: A Randomised Controlled Trial.” The Lancet 366, no. 9481 (July 16, 2005): 225–233. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(05)66912-7. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16023513
4. WHO Pneumonia Fact Sheet: http://www.who.int/mediacentre/factsheets/fs331/en/
5. WHO Diarrhoeal Fact Sheet: http://www.who.int/mediacentre/factsheets/fs330/en/
6. http://www.naturalnews.com/030384_Louis_Pasteur_disease.html
7. http://www.cdc.gov/rotavirus/about/prevention.html
8. http://www.cdc.gov/Features/Pneumonia/
9. http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2009/06/25/vaccine-doctor-given-at-least-30-million-dollars-to-push-vaccines.aspx