Vaccine-Induced Antibodies not Necessary to Fight Viruses


Historically, the medical-pharmaceutical establishment have pushed vaccines as the miraculous solution for every single health problem that humans face. The pharmaceutical power houses came to the conclusion that vaccines were necessary because the body needed to build antibodies in order to fight disease and that vaccines were the best tool to ensure that the human immune system would have the capacity to produce such antibodies. As we already know, vaccines are at the very least ineffective, toxic cocktails of heavy metals and live viruses that not only don’t prevent disease, but that actually cause it.

Countless studies — please do your own research — have shown the relationship between vaccine ingredients such as mercury, squalene, adjuvants and medical conditions such as autism, cancer, conditions of the nervous system, brain injury, and so on. Medical professionals like Rossell Blaylock and Andrew Wakefield have spoken endlessly about the dangers that vaccines pose — as they are now produced and administered — to human health. But despite the numerous studies and warnings from uncompromised medical professionals, health authorities and pharmaceutical companies have always worked in unison to impose a criminal standard that everyone must be vaccinated for their own good.

Although most official government policies indicate that vaccines are properly tested and continuously monitored for side effects and reactions, most of those vaccines are tested and monitored by the vaccine producer, who then sends its findings to the “vigilant authorities”. These authorities then give the makers thumbs up to mass produce it and later recommend it and add it to the ever growing number of inoculations that people, especially children, must take from birth.

There is only one problem; a new problem, for the medical-pharmaceutical cartel: The Human body does not need vaccine produced antibodies to fight disease such as viruses, bacteria or other pathogens. Our human immune system actually has the capacity to produce natural antibodies which then work as defenses against disease. The human immune system is composed by original and constructed elements — created after a person is born and grows up — that work together to keep the body safe from illnesses without the need for artificially, lab-made products. This may come as a surprise to many, but it is not new for others who freely and independently educate themselves about ways to prevent and cure disease.

Current official vaccine science establishes that when a person is injected with a vaccine, the ingredients in it cause the body to respond to the vaccine as if it were a real attack from a virus or any other pathogen. The body then responds to this supposed attack by creating antibodies to deal with it. In the future, if the virus or organism attacks the person again, the immune system will know how to react and defend from the attack. This is explained as the immune system “learning” how to act in case of an infection. The problem is that “learning” how to fight disease is something the body already knows how to do, it is a natural ability, as so is its capacity to produce antibodies. What vaccine-induced antibody creation does is actually alter the natural response the human immune system has which in fact impairs the body to react to a disease that is not exactly the same as the one injected in our body through a vaccine. This is the case if the seasonal flu.

The flu virus is, due to the use of vaccines — an ever morphing organism that is NEVER the same. When people inject themselves with the seasonal flu vaccine that contains last year’s strain of the virus, the new strain does not have any problem penetrating a degrade immune system that is not only defenseless against it, but also incapable of dealing with the new version of the virus by itself.

This is where the study published in the Journal Immunity comes in handy. The study shows that vaccine induced antibodies are not able to fight disease by themselves, a feature that is only present in naturally occurring antibodies generated by our immune system. This is the fact that absolutely debunks the myth that vaccines are necessary to remain free of pesky viruses and bacteria that may cause disease. As in many other cases, the supposed scientific theory is just that; theory. As cited by the study, vaccines do not help prevent or combat infections. “Our findings contradict the current view that antibodies are absolutely required to survive infection with viruses like VSV (vesicular stomatitis virus), and establish an unexpected function for B cells as custodians of macrophages in antiviral immunity,” says Dr. Uldrich H. von Andrian from Harvard Medical School.

Dr. von Andrian added that “It will be important to further dissect the role of antibodies and interferons in immunity against similar viruses that attack the nervous system, such as rabies, West Nile virus, and Encephalitis.”

So if vaccines do not work as the pharmaceutical power houses advertise and if they impair the natural immune system from actually fighting disease, why are government agencies always recommending that we all use them? According to brain surgeon Russell Blaylock, vaccines inhibit the immune system from producing TH2-type cytokines on top of suppressing cellular immunity. The result of a weakened, useless immune system is a weaker human body that will not only be more vulnerable to get sick, but that will also take longer to recover, if it does. What the results of this study represent is the last nail in the coffin of vaccine pseudoscience. Vaccines have gone from being the best invention since the appearance of the wheel, to becoming a dangerous but necessary evil, to an ineffective method to fight disease.

Incredible as it sounds, such a common-sense controlled study comparing vaccinated to unvaccinated children has never been done in America for any vaccination,” says Dr. Phillip Incao MD. Dr. Incao is backed by many independent medical professionals, such as doctor Harold Buttram. There have never been any studies of this nature, and apparently none have been attempted,” says Dr. Buttram MD.

In addition to the information above, it is important to say that the current mandatory vaccination systems — there is no law that legally obligates anyone to take a vaccine — in almost all countries violate the  Nuremberg Code, the set of rules that all medical professional must follow, but that few implement when dealing with the use of vaccines.According to the Vaccine Adverse Reporting Systems (VAERS), there were  at least 2,142, confirmed deaths and 3,177 people permanently disabled from 1991-2001 from vaccinations. See Surveillance for Safety After Immunization. But in actuality, complete statistics show that the consequences are significantly worse. Deaths amount to between 21,420 – 142,800 deaths if one takes into account that only 1.5-10% of adverse events are reported.

According to the Global Vaccine Institute, vaccinations are responsible for causing disease such as AIDS, Cancer, Diabetes, Hearing/Vision Loss, Hepatitis B, MMR, Mumps, Polio, Rubella and Autism, without anyone ever demonstrating that a single vaccine cured any existing disease.

If you are curious to learn what are some of the ingredients used in the production of vaccines — many of which make their way into your body — please be courageous and see the list provided by the CDC here.

Vaccines NEVER helped decrease the incidence of any disease, much less to cure anyone.


You may share our original content as long as you respect our copyright policy as shown on our website footer. Please don’t cut articles from The Real Agenda to redistribute by email or post to the web if you don’t follow our policies.

Luis Miranda is the founder and editor of The Real Agenda. For more of his stories, subscribe to our article feed. You can also follow him on Twitter and Facebook. Email article ideas and insights through the Contact page.

IDflu: Sanofi-Pasteur’s Vaccine Cocktail

by Luis R. Miranda
The Real Agenda
September 7, 2010

As The Real Agenda reported a few weeks ago, the globalists who created the fraudulent H1N1 influenza pandemic, widely recorded as such, are back hungrier than ever for more fraud and more dollars. Recently, the newspaper La Nacion of Costa Rica published an article concerning the availability of the new vaccine from the pharmaceutical company Sanofi-Pasteur called IDFlu. The article, like almost everything this newspaper publishes is full of lies and half truths, so I was forced to write an article that talks about the details that Irene Rodriguez, the newspaper’s writer, omitted.

This is the tiny needle used to inject IDflu which is sold as one of the new "conveniences" because the pinch people feel is not so painful.

I wrote her an e-mail describing the details that were omitted, although I do not expect her to re-write it with the information documented in the e-mail. “I read your article on the new vaccine from Sanofi- Pasteur called IDFlu. I am concerned about omission of important details about the vaccine.” These details are precisely those that are never described to the public and for which many people still believe it’s a great idea to get vaccinated continuously.

First, the vaccine is the first of several types that will be offered to the public as a “cocktail” with various viruses including the infamous H1N1. With this, the consumer no longer has the option to choose which vaccine he wants to use, but will have to take them all; all in one. This eliminates the right to choose. In fact, the vaccine contains three viruses:
A / New Caledonia/20/99 (H1N1) like strain (A / New Caledonia/20/99 (IVR-116)) 9 micrograms HA, A/Wisconsin/67/2005 (H3N2 ) like strain (A/Wisconsin/67/2005 (NYMC X-161), 9 micrograms HA, B / Malaysia/2506/2004 like strain (B/Malaysia/2506/2004) 9 micrograms HA. View the original document descriptive of the vaccine.Page 32

Second, the article does not highlight the list of side effects, which are as severe as in other types of vaccines: Blood and lymphatic system disorders,encephalomyelitis (inflammation of the brain and spinal cord), Neuritis, Guillain Barre Syndrome, Inflammation of blood vessels, seizures, neurological diseases and immunogenicity, or the appearance of immunological reactions that usually end in partial or complete paralysis. Page 39

In addition, the article does not say that the clinical studies were conducted only from the time the vaccine is injected up to three weeks later, a period during which it is difficult to detect serious side effects, such as those cited above, (especially immunogenicity) because they usually occur after that period. The pharmaceutical company follow ups conveniently end at the end of six months, meaning that it does not carefully observes side effects that appear later. Therefore, Sanofi-Pasteur cannot say it can rule out serious side effects caused by the use of the vaccine, because monitoring is not done. However, Sanofi-Pasteur says that these effects are rare or nonexistent (Bottom of Page 4). Based on what does it make this observation? Not through scientific studies.

Third, according to the descriptive document that details the origin, manufacture and composition of the vaccine, clinical studies were conducted in European populations. In other words, any result obtained in these studies can not be used to prove the vaccine’s effectiveness or safety in other populations. How is it that the sale of a product that has not been studied to see its efficacy or risk of side effects in specific populations is allowed on the market? This question should be asked to your Department of Health.

Fourth, the results obtained regarding the safety of the vaccine for human use are based on animal studies (5.3 on page 6) and these studies, according to the pharmaceutical company, DO show immunogenicity.

Fifth, safety studies were not conducted after the vaccine was placed on the market and neither were incompatibility or clinical studies on the effects the vaccine may have on human motor skills, for example, to operating a vehicle equipment or machines, etc.

Finally, the vaccine contains formaldehyde, or formalin -in its liquid form-, a toxic ingredient used in vaccines and whose cumulative effect weakens the immune system, causes genetic alterations, metabolic acidosis, circulatory shock, respiratory failure and acute renal failure. Formalin is also a sensitizer, which means it can make you sensitive or allergic to many other things. It is corrosive if ingested, and is a possible carcinogen. In addition to the above, vaccines usually contain other ingredients such as thimerosal, squalene, adjuvants, sodium chloride, potassium chloride, disodium phosphate dihydrate and potassium dihydrogen phosphate.

However, the news about this vaccine are not its ingredients, but its behavior in the body. According to details contained in the official document, the vaccine is not injected into the muscle as traditionally done. Sanofi uses a new method, the intradermal. The exact dose of 0.1 ml is injected just under the skin, for more immediate action. Is it possible that the same speed with which such acts in the supposed task of immunization can be seen in the appearance of side effects? The pharmaceutical company Sanofi-Pasteur does not detail anything about it.

Perhaps the only positive side, specifically for Costa Ricans, is that health authorities are not going to buy the vaccine from the pharmaceutical company, at least for now, so those who want to inject the cocktail of viruses and formalin will have to take 24 dollars out of their pockets to buy it from local pharmacies. In this case, there is no taxpayer money for enriching the bank accounts of the corporation Sanofi-Pasteur.

World Health Organization Distributing Anti-fertility Vaccines

Jurriaan Maessen

In addition to the recent PrisonPlanet-exclusive Rockefeller Foundation Developed Vaccines For “Mass-Scale” Fertility Reduction — which outlines the Rockefeller Foundation’s efforts in the 1960s funding research into so-called “anti-fertility vaccines”– another series of documents has surfaced, proving beyond any doubt that the UN Population Fund, World Bank and World Health Organization picked up on it, further developing it under responsibility of a “Task Force on Vaccines for Fertility Regulation”.

Just four years after the Rockefeller Foundation launched massive funding-operations into anti-fertility vaccines, the Task Force was created under auspices of the World Health Organization, World Bank and UN Population Fund. Its mission, according to one of its members, to support:

basic and clinical research on the development of birth control vaccines directed against the gametes or the preimplantation embryo. These studies have involved the use of advanced procedures in peptide chemistry, hybridoma technology and molecular genetics as well as the evaluation of a number of novel approaches in general vaccinology. As a result of this international, collaborative effort, a prototype anti-HCG vaccine is now undergoing clinical testing, raising the prospect that a totally new family planning method may be available before the end of the current decade.

In regards to the scope of the Task Force’s jurisdiction, the Biotechnology and Development Monitor reported:

The Task Force acts as a global coordinating body for anti-fertility vaccine R&D in the various working groups and supports research on different approaches, such as anti-sperm and anti-ovum vaccines and vaccines designed to neutralize the biological functions of hCG. The Task Force has succeeded in developing a prototype of an anti-hCG-vaccine.

One of the Task Force members, P.D. Griffin, outlined the purpose and trajectory of these Fertility Regulating Vaccines. Griffin:

“The Task Force has continued to coordinate its research activities with other vaccine development programmes within WHO and with other international and national programmes engaged in the development of fertility regulating vaccines.”

Griffin also admitted to the fact that one of the purposes of the vaccines is the implementation in developing countries. Griffin:

“If vaccines could be developed which could safely and effectively inhibit fertility, without producing unacceptable side effects, they would be an attractive addition to the present armamentarium of fertility regulating methods and would be likely to have a significant impact on family planning programmes.”

Also, one of the advantages of the FRVs over “currently available methods of fertility regulation” the Task Force states, is the following (179):

“low manufacturing cost and ease of delivery within existing health services.”

Already in 1978, the WHO’s Task Force (then called Task Force on Immunological Methods for Fertility Regulation) underlined the usefulness of these vaccines in regards to the possibility of “large scale synthesis and manufacture” of the vaccine:

“The potential advantages of an immunological approach to fertility regulation can be summarized as follows: (a) the possibility of infrequent administration, possibly by paramedical personnel; (b) the use of antigens or antigen fragments, which are not pharmacologically active; and (c) in the case of antigens of known chemical structure, there is the possibility of large-scale synthesis and manufacture of vaccine at relatively low cost.

In 1976, the WHO Expanded Programme of Research, Development and Research Training in Human Reproduction published a report, stating:

“In 1972 the Organization (…) expanded its programme of research in human reproduction to provide an international focus for an intensified effort to improve existing methods of fertility regulation, to develop new methods and to assist national authorities in devising the best ways of providing them on a continuing basis. The programme is closely integrated with other WHO research on the delivery of family planning care by health services, which in turn feeds into WHO’s technical assistance programme to governments at the service level.”

Although the term “Anti-Fertility Vaccine”, coined by the Rockefeller Foundation, was replaced by the more bureaucratic sounding “Fertility Regulating Vaccine (FRV), the programme was obviously the same. Besides, The time line shows conclusively that the WHO, UN Population Fund and World Bank continued on a path outlined by the Rockefellers in the late 1960s. By extensions, it proves that all these organization are perfectly interlocked, best captured under the header “Scientific Dictatorship”. The relationship between the WHO and the Rockefeller Foundation is intense. In the 1986 bulletin of the World Health Organization, this relationship is being described in some detail. While researching the effectiveness of “gossypol” as an “antifertility agent”, the bulletin states:

“The Rockefeller Foundation has supported limited clinical trials in China and small scale clinical studies in Brazil and Austria. The dose administered in the current Chinese trial has been reduced from 20 mg to 10-15 mg/day during the loading phase in order to see if severe oligospermia rather than consistent azoospermia would be adequate for an acceptable, non-toxic and reversible effect. Meanwhile, both the WHO human reproduction programme and the Rockefeller Foundation are supporting animal studies to better define the mechanism of action of gossypol.

In August of 1992, a series of meetings was held in Geneva, Switzerland, regarding “fertility regulating vaccines”. According to the document Fertility Regulating Vaccines (classified by the WHO with a limited distribution) present at those meetings were scientists and clinicians from all over the globe, including then biomedical researcher of the American Agency for International development, and current research-chief of USAID, Mr. Jeff Spieler.

In 1986 Mr. Spieler declared:

“A new approach to fertility regulation is the development of vaccines directed against human substances required for reproduction. Potential candidates for immunological interference include reproductive hormones, ovum and sperm antigens, and antigens derived from embryonic or fetal tissue.(…). An anti-fertility vaccine must be capable of safely and effectively inhibiting a human substance, which would need somehow to be rendered antigenic. A fertility-regulating vaccine, moreover, would have to produce and sustain effective immunity in at least 95% of the vaccinated population, a level of protection rarely achieved even with the most successful viral and bacterial vaccines. But while these challenges looked insuperable just a few years ago, recent advances in biotechnology- particularly in the fields of molecular biology, genetic engineering and monoclonal antibody production- are bringing antifertility vaccines into the realm of the feasible.”

“Vaccines interfering with sperm function and fertilization could be available for human testing by the early 1990s”, Spieler wrote.

In order for widespread use of these vaccines, Spieler writes, the vaccine must conquer “variations in individual responses to immunization with fertility-regulating vaccines”.

“Research”, he goes on to say,”is also needed in the field of “basic vaccinology”, to find the best carrier proteins, adjuvants, vehicles and delivery systems.”

In the 1992 document, the problem of “variations in individual responses” is also discussed:

“Because of the genetic diversity of human populations”, states the document, “immune responses to vaccines often show marked differences from one individual to another in terms of magnitude and duration. These differences may be partly or even completely overcome with appropriately engineered FRVs (Fertility Regulating Vaccines) and by improvements in our understanding of what is required to develop and control the immune response elicited by different vaccines.”

The picture emerging from these facts is clear. The WHO, as a global coordinating body, has since the early 70s continued the development of the Rockefeller-funded “anti-fertility vaccine”. What also is becoming clear, is that extensive research has been done to the delivery systems in which these anti-fertility components can be buried, such as regular anti-viral vaccines. It’s a mass-scale anti-fertilization programme with the aim of reducing the world’s population: a dream long cherished by the global elite.